(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Minutes"

^CLOSED 
STACKS 



m 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REFERENCE 
BOOK 

\<;/ In lie hiktlt /runt ///< l.iluan' 



EC 1 2 



SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 1223 05718 3361 



^v 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/6minutes1998sanf 



F 
) 



BOARD of SUPERVISORS 




NOTICE OF CANCELLED MEETINGS 

.FINANCE COMMITTEE 

S.F. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308 

San Francisco 94102-4532 

554-5184 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

AUG 2 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 



NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the regularly scheduled meetings of the 
Finance Committee for Wednesday v August 26, 1 998, S eptember 2, 1998 and 
September 9, 1998, at 1:00 p.m., have been gjncelle d^ 

The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Finance Committee will be 
held on Wednesday, September 16, 1998, at 1:00 p.m. in Room 410, Veterans 
Building, 401 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, California. 



//John L.Taylor U*i£- 
v Clerk of the Board 



Posted: August 19, 1998 



3 1223 05718 3361 



B90.a^ ^MINUTES :: - DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

*<* ^FINANCE COMMITTEE ^ 171998 

7 I ..lap .BOARD OF SUPERVISORS e AN FRANCISCO 

V 7 7f CITY AND CX)ONTY OF SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LlBRAFtf 



REGULAR MEETING 



PUEL 



WEDNESDAY. SEPTEMBER 16. 1998 - 1:00 P.M. VETERANS BUILDING 

401 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

Meeting Commenced: 1:07 p.m. 

CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All items listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are 
considered routine by Committee and will be acted on by a 
single, roll-call vote of Committee. There will be no separate 
discussion of items unless a member of the Committee or the 
public so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed 
from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate item. 

a. File 98-1415 . [Prop J Contract, Airport Information Booth 
Program] Resolution approving the Controller's 
certification that Airport Information Booth Services at 
San Francisco International Airport can be practically 
performed by private contractor at a lower cost than if 
work were performed by City employees at presently budgeted 
levels. (Airport) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 

b. File 98-1354 . [Reserved Funds, Fire Dept.] Hearing to 
consider release of reserved funds, Fire Dept. (1992 Fire 
Protection Bond Interest Earnings, Ord. No. 91-96) , in the 
amount of $112,000 for purpose of funding construction 
contract for Fire Station No. 25 renovation; see File 
98-1353. (Dept. of Public Works) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $112,000 approved. Filed. 

c. File 98-137 3. [Emergency Repair, Spruce Street Sewer] 
Resolution approving the expenditure of funds for the 
emergency work to replace the structurally inadequate sewer 
in Spruce Street from Sacramento Street to California 
Street - $78,151.74. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. ? 452 43 SFPL : ECONO JRS 

206 SFPL 11/22/00 71 



File 98-1374 . [Emergency Repair, Ordway Street Sewer] 
Resolution approving the expenditure of funds for the 
emergency work to replace the structurally inadeguate sewer 
in Ordway Street from Brussels Street to Goettingen Street 
- $68,740.00. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 

File 98-1378 . [Emergency Repair, Clayton Street Retaining 
Wall] Resolution finding and declaring a public emergency 
exists at Clayton Street; authorizing the Director of 
Public Works to take necessary measures in the most 
expeditious manner to protect the public safety, health, 
welfare, and property of the Citizens of San Francisco from 
the dangerous condition created by failure of the retaining 
wall at Clayton Street; and, because of this emergency, 
authorizing the Director to enter into agreements of 
indemnity - $347,500. (Department of Fublic Works) 

SPEAKERS: Fernando Cisneros, Dept . of Public Works - 
support; Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney - 
provided information. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on page 1, line 13 to 

replace "Corbett Avenue and Pemberton Place" with 
"Twin Peaks Boulevard and Greystone Terrace"; 
amended on page 3 beginning on line 5 after 
"($347,500)" to add "; and, be it FURTHER 
RESOLVED, That the City Attorney and the 
Department of Public Works are requested to seek 
to recover from the adjacent property owners, to 
the extent possible, the property owner's fair 
share of the expenses required to restore the 
retaining wall." Recommended as amended. 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 98-1176 . [Settlement of Grievance, Fariba Mahmoudi] 
Ordinance authorizing settlement of the pay grievance of Fariba 
Mahmoudi filed pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding 
between the International Federation of Professional and 
Technical Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, and the City and County 
of San Francisco in the amount of Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred 
Twenty-Six Dollars and Fifty Cents ($16,826.50). (Department of 
Human Resources) 
( Consideration continued from 8/5/98) 

SPEAKER: Paula Schiff, Employee Relations Division - requested 
continuance. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to 9/23/98. 



3. File 98-1424 . [Equipment Lease Supplement #7, Series 1998A 
Bonds] Ordinance approving the form of and authorizing execution 
and delivery by the City and County of San Francisco of an 
amended and restated Equipment Lease and an Equipment Lease 
Supplement No. 7 each between the City and County of San 
Francisco Finance Corporation, as lessor, and the City and 
County of San Francisco, as lessee, with respect to equipment to 
be used for City purposes, a related certificate of approval and 
a continuing disclosure certificate; approving the issuance of 
Lease Revenue Bonds by said nonprofit corporation in an amount 
not to exceed $11,500,000; providing for reimbursement to the 
City of certain City expenditures incurred prior to the issuance 
of Lease Revenue Bonds; and providing for the execution of 
documents in connection therewith and ratifying previous actions 
taken in connection therewith. (Mayor's Office of Finance and 
Legislative Affairs) 

SPEAKER: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

4. File 98-1366 . [Appropriations Limit, FY 1998-1999] Resolution 
establishing the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1998-1999 
pursuant to California Constitution Article XIII B. (Controller) 

SPEAKER: Ed Harrington, Controller - provided information. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

5. File 98-1404 . [Tax Rate Setting, CCSF, FY 1998-1999] Ordinance 
providing revenue and levying taxes for City and County purposes 
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1999. (Controller) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Ed Harrington, Controller 
- provided information. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Question divided concerning tax rate 

passthrough (See File 98-1541) . Remainder recommended 
as divided (same title) . 

File 98-1541 . [Tax Rate Pass Through] Resolution 
establishing tax rate pass through amount for 
residential tenants pursuant to Chapter 37 of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code (Residential Rent 
Stabilization) . (Controller) 

ACTION: Divided from File 98-1404. Consideration 
continued to 9/23/98. 

6. File 98-1405 . [Tax Rate Setting, SFUSD, FY 1998-1999] Ordinance 
providing revenue and levying taxes for San Francisco Unified 
School District purposes for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1999. (Controller) 

SPEAKER: Ed Harrington, Controller - provided information. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-1406 . [Tax Rate Setting, S.F. Community College, FY 
1998-1999] Ordinance providing revenue and levying taxes for San 
Francisco Community College District purposes for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1999. (Controller) 

SPEAKER: Ed Harrington, Controller - provided information. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

File 98-1407 . [Appropriation, Art Commission] Ordinance 
amending the Annual Appropriation Ordinance for fiscal year 
1998-1999, File Number 98-0850, Ordinance Number 242-98, to meet 
the requirements of the Art Commission pursuant to Charter 
Section 16.106. RO #98017. (Controller) 

SPEAKER: Ed Harrington, Controller - provided information. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



VOTE ON ALL ITEMS WAS 3-0 . 
Meeting Adjourned: 1:32 p.m. 



Public Library,Gov't Info. Ctr., 5 th Fir 
Attn: Susan Horn 

7 



CITY AND COUNTY ISUSSlsSUiJ) OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD 01 




ll<<l% 



BUDGET ANALYST 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SEP i 6 1998 

SAN FRANCESCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



1390 Market Street. Suite 1025, San Francisco. CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



September 11. 1998 
TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst /?e^«4d,»^ -d^ ^tf.^ W ■ 

SUBJECT: September 16. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item la -File 98-1415 

Department: Airport 

Item: Resolution approving the Controller's certification that 

Airport Information Booth Services at San Francisco 
International Airport can continue to be practically 
performed by a private contractor for lower cost than if 
similar work were performed by City and County 
employees. 

Services to be 

Performed: Airport Information Booth Services 

Description: Charter Section 10.104(15) provides that the City may 

contract with private firms for services that had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work performed by City employ, s 

The Controller has determined that contracting for 
Aii-port Information Booth Services for FY 1998-99 would 
result in estimated savings as follows: 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Citv-Operated Services Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Operating Expenses 
Total 

Contractual Services Cost 

Estimated Savings 



Comments: 



Lowest 

Salary 

Step 

$1,080,287 
494,210 
170.990 

$1,745,487 



Highest 

Salary 

Step 

$1,304,642 
622,906 
170.990 

$2,098,538 



1.300.000 1.300.000 



$445,487 



$798,538 



1. The Airport Department reports that Airport 
Information Booth Services Program involves the 
provision of information to air passengers regarding 
airport facilities and services, available ground 
transportation, regional accommodations, and visitor 
services and events. These contractual services were first 
certified as required under Proposition J (Charter Section 
10.104(15)) in 1990, and have been continuously provided 
by an outside contractor since then. 



2. Ms. Alice Sgourakis of the Airport reports that the 
current Airport Information Booth Services Program 
contract with Polaris Research and Development, Inc. 
began on October 15, 1995. The contract term is for one 
j ear, with four annual renewals up to a maximum term of 
five years. At the end of the current one-year renewal 
period on October 14, 1998, the Airport plans to exercise 
its option to renew this contract for the 12-month period 
from October 15, 1998 to October 14, 1999. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is based on the current contractor's estimate 
of the costs to provide Information Booth Services for the 
12-month period from October 15, 1998 to October 14, 
1999. 



Recommendation: 



4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Airport's responses is shown in the Attachment to this 
report. 

Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



AUG. 27. 1998 1:56PM SFI A LANDS IDE OPS Attachment m , 100 n 

NO. 5188 P. 2 



(2) 

(3) 

M 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 



(8) 



(9) 



DEPARTMENT' 

CONTRACT SERVICTS- bf Lancs.de Operation, 

CONTRACT PEKInn i" 1 "" '"""""■on IAI) Soon Pro;r™ 

riKIOD. otwte 15. 1998 . October | 4 . 1999 

£■£ »*> fou, addi^ „„ c . yrar ^ £££ c „, . ":T''°" ^^ "^ » * W fb, one 

wA' ( tt::'" on °*'™ pi ° vra if "•" ~™ - -" °«- 
JSSrt^r- — - - ■• * -* - - . ...... or .„ M80tat 

ESSE? nra ' w r - ■ "■*— j <*— . h„ ,, ^ miRtd ,„ ach 

-J*W 0„ *« Al ^ „ ^ n S sd ^*;'* """" lS0%> »•»» Pota* p=,0»„«| 

£££ ,0 t ch,ew ■ "*■ ■ "• «- - ^ESSSSSit'Tf - " """^ 

. „T B r rne =am w is *■ ■" *■ — -»**. » ^*i** 

uutw again ciimtv 
for its employe? ' thc pr0 P osed ""tractor prov.de health insurance 

° n pay - ™ c wntrac:or also prov.de; a 40 1 K rerirem^ ' "H" hle '""ranee. 5 ,ck leave 

,r " rncn[ Program :or emplovees 

=»»ply -„h , he Dom«ie P,ra„ „ rtta °° , P '" »»«•*» *» a. proper M „ OT<:tor 

• oiaris Provides ber-nr.; rr. ._ _i 

_ ^ «, „. , 1a ofe ;te= ben=fo b ^ 

Department RepreMatative: 

Telephone Number: Sgourakis 

(650)794-6516 „„„ r/ 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item lb -File 98-1354 



Department: 
Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



Fire Department 
Department of Public Works 

Release of reserved funds from 1992 Fire Department 
Bond Interest Earnings, in the amount of $112,000 for the 
renovation of Fire Station No. 25, located at 3305 3 rd 

Street. 

$112,000 

1992 Fire Protection Bond Interest Earnings 

On March 6, 1996, the Board of Supervisors appropriated 
$1,600,000 of 1992 Fire Protection Bond interest earnings 
(File No. 101-95-45) for various capital improvement 
projects at the Fire Department. Of the $1,600,000, 
$558,000 of these funds were placed on reserve pending 
the DPW's submission of cost details. 

The Finance Committee subsequently authorized the 
release of funds in the amount of $446,000 from the 
reserved balance of $558,000 for other various projects, 
leaving a balance of $112,000 on reserve. The proposed 
request would authorize the release of $112,000 for the 
renovation of Fire Station No. 25, depleting all of the 
bond interest earnings appropriation. 

According to Mr. Peter Wong of the Department of Public 
Works, construction work to be performed for the 
renovation of Fire Station No. 25, located at 3305 3 rd 
Street, consists of seismic upgrading for the entire 
building, creating separate shower and restroom facilities 
for female firefighters, mechanical and electrical system 
upgrades, asbestos abatement and disability assess 
improvements in public areas. 

The construction contract for the renovation of Fire 
Station No. 25 totals $1,809,000 and was awarded to MLS 
Construction which submitted the second lowest bid. 
According to Mr. Wong, the lowest bid, which was $14,000 
less than the MLS Construction bid, was submitted by a 
firm which did not provide the DPW with the requisite 
information about its subcontractors. As a result, Mr. 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Wong states that the firm that submitted the low bid was 
disqualified from the pool of eligible contract bidders. 

The proposed request for release of $112,000 from the 
bond interest earnings for the renovation of Fire Station 
No. 25 requires an additional $1,697,000 (total 
construction contract amount of $1,809,000 less the 
requested release of $112,000 on reserve). According to 
Mr. Wong, the source of the additional $1,697,000 would 
be from previously appropriated, unexpended 1992 Fire 
Protection Bond monies in the amount of $163,402 (File 
No. 101-92-60) and from current legislation which is 
pending approval from the Board of Supervisors for the 
release of reserved monies from the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency Mitigation Grant Funds in the 
amount of $1,533,598 (Item 2, File No. 98-1353, on the 
September 15, 1998, Economic Development, 
Transportation and Technology Committee Meeting). 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed release of reserved funds. 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lc- File 98-1373 
Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



Comment: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $78,151.74 for emergency repair work to 
replace the structurally inadequate sewer in Spruce 
Street between Sacramento Street and California Street. 

S78.151.74 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on March 
10. 1998 the sewer located in Spruce Street between 
Sacramento Street and California Street failed, and 
immediate repairs were required in order to protect the 
health, welfare, and property of the Citizens of San 
Francisco. The PUC declared an emergency on March 10, 
1998. In accordance with Section 6.30 of the 
Administrative Code, the PUC initiated expedited 
contract procedures and awarded a contract to Harty 
Pipelines, Inc., the low bidder, in the amount of $69,480. 

The total estimated project cost is 578,151.74. including 
$55,501.74 in actual construction costs (or $13,978.26 less 
than the bid amount; see Comment No. 2) and S22.650 for 
DPW engineering and construction management costs. 
The Attachment details the DPW engineering and 
construction management costs. 

1. Mr. P. T. Law, Project Manager for the DPW, advises 
that Harty Pipelines, Inc. submitted the low bid for the 
emergency repair work. The table below lists the bidders 
and the amounts bid: 

Bidder Bid Amount 

Harty Pipelines, Inc. $69,4S0 

JMB Construction, Inc. $94,985 

A. Ruiz Construction Co. & Assoc, Inc. $127,825 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
6 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. Mr. Law advises that the final payment to the 
Contractor was $55,501.74, or $13,978.26 less than the 
bid amount of $69,480, to adjust for the actual cost of 
construction. 

3. Mr. Law reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on March 19, 1998 and was completed on 
April 9, 1998. 

4. Mr. Law advises that due to various delays in receiving 
expenditure documentation from the Contractor, the PUC 
is requesting approval of this proposed resolution 
approximately five months after the construction work 
was completed. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment 



Cost Breakdown for ( J.O. #1595N, Contract #CW-172) 
Spruce Street Emergency Sewer Replacement 

Bureau of Engineering 



Classification 



Title 



Rate 



Hours 



Cost 



5504 


Project Manager II 


5 


92 


5 


$ 


460 


5206 


Associate Civil Engineer 


$ 


75 


27 


S 


2,025 


5202 


Junior Civil Engineer 


S 


50 


64 


$ 


3,200 


5366 


Civil Engineering Associate II 


$ 


60 


81 


$ 


4,860 


5381 


Engineering Student Trainee II 


$ 


33 


22 


$ 


726 


142S 


Secretary 


$ 


43 


32 


$ 


1,376 












s 


12,647 










Rounded: 


s 


12,650 



Bureau of Construction Management 



Classification 


Title 




Rate 


Hours 




Cost 


5210 
520B 
5204 
5318 


Senior Civil Engineer 

C'rvil Engineer 

Assistant Civil Engineer 

Construction Inspector 


S 
$ 
$ 
S 


100 
80 
62 
70 


5 
8 

82 
54 


S 
S 
$ 

s 


500 
640 

5,084 

3,780 



$ 10,004 

Rounded: S 10,000 



t'Qfl 



80£"ON 



T9t-a ess sifr <- sonnwaaAH 30a ndajs 



£0:21 



86/20/60 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item Id- File 98-1374 



Department: 



Item: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $68,740 for emergency repair work to replace 
the structurally inadequate sewer on Ordway Street from 
Brussels Street to Goettingen Street. 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



568,740 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on March 
12, 1998 the sewer located in Ordway Street from 
Brussels Street to Goettingen Street failed and immediate 
repairs were required in order to protect the health, 
welfare and property of the Citizens of San Francisco. 
The PUC declared an emergency on March 13, 1998. In 
accordance with Section 6.30 of the Administrative Code, 
the PUC initiated expedited contract procedures and the 
PUC awarded a contract to Harty Pipelines, Inc., the low 
bidder, in the amount of $59,340. 

The total estimated project cost is $68,740, including 
$50,740 in actual construction costs (or $8,600 less than 
the bid amount; see Comment No. 2) and $18,000 for 
DPW engineering and construction management costs. 
The Attachment details the DPW engineering and 
construction management costs. 



Comment: 



1. Mr. P. T. Law, Project Manager for the DPW, advises 
that Harty Pipelines, Inc. submitted the low bid for the 
emergency repair work. The table below lists the bidders 
and the amounts: 



Bidder 



Bid Amount 



Harty Pipelines, Inc. $59,340 

JMB Construction, Inc. $65,876 

Troy's Contracting/Trinet Construction $78,936 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
9 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. Mr. Law advises that the final payment to the 
Contractor was $50,740, or $8,600 less than the bid 
amount of $59,340, to adjust for the actual cost of 
construction. 

3. Mr. Law reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on March 26, 1998 and was completed on 
April 21, 1998. 

1 Mr. Law advises that due to various delays in receiving 
expenditure documentation from the Contractor, the PUC 
is requesting approval of this proposed resolution 
approximately five months after the construction work 
was completed. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
10 



Attachment 



Cost Breakdown for ( J.O. #1596N, Contract #CW-i79) 
Ordway Street Emergency Sewer Replacement 



Bureau of Engineering 



Classification 


Title 


Re 


te 


Hours 




Cost 


5504 


Project Manager li 


S 


92 


4 


S 


368 


5206 


Associate Civil Enaineer 


s 


75 


19 


s 


1,425 


5202 


Junior Civil Engineer 


s 


50 


46 


s 


2,300 


5366 


Civil Engineering Associate II 


$ 


60 


57 


s 


3,420 


5381 


Engineering Student Trainee II 


s 


33 


15 


$ 


495 


1426 


Secretary 


s 


43 


23 


$ 


969 



$ 8,997 

Rounded: S 9,000 



Bureau of Construction Management 



Classrfi cation 


Title 




Rate 


Hours 




Cost 


5210 


Senior Civil Engineer 


S 


100 


4 


$ 


400 


5208 


Civil Engineer 


$ 


80 


8 


S 


640 


5204 


Assistant Civil Engineer 


$ 


62 


73 


$ 


4,525 


531B 


Construction Inspector 


$ 


70 


49 


S 


3.430 



5 8,996 

Rounded: S 9,000 



Page 1 

11 

'JdQ 80£ - ON T9t70 SSS ST* «■ SDnflbaCIAH 30S. PldOdS £0=£T 86/20/60 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item le - File 98-1378 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution finding and declaring a public emergency 
exists at Clayton Street; authorizing the Director of the 
Department of Public Works to take necessary measures 
in the most expeditious manner to protect the public 
safety, health, welfare, and property of the citizens of San 
Francisco from the dangerous condition created by the 
failure of the retaining wall at Clayton Street; and, 
because of this emergency, authorizing the Director to 
enter into agreements of indemnity. 

$347,500 

Capital Improvement Project Funds for FY 1998-99 

According to Ms. Judi Mosqueda of the Department of 
Public Works (DPW), the heavy rainfall during the 1997- 
1998 rainy season caused the failure of a retaining wall at 
Clayton Street, between Corbett Avenue and Pemberton 
Place. Ms. Mosqueda advises that the failure of the 
retaining wall has created a dangerous condition which 
threatens the public safety, health, welfare, and property 
of the citizens of San Francisco. 

On July 30, 1998, the DPW declared that an emergency 
existed at Clayton Street that required DPW to take 
immediate remedial action to reconstruct the retaining 
wall before the approaching rainy season. The proposed 
resolution declares the existence of an emergency and 
authorizes the DPW to proceed in the most expeditious 
manner to perform the necessary work to reconstruct the 
retaining wall at Clayton Street, between Corbett Avenue 
and Pemberton Place. 

The proposed resolution would also authorize the Director 
of DPW to enter into agreements to hire necessary 
consultants and contractors for the emergency work at 
Clayton Street. Such agreements may contain a provision 
indemnifying such consultants and contractors from 
claims or other losses, except those caused by or resulting 
from the gross negligence or intentional acts or omissions 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

of the consultants or contractors, their officers, agents, or 
employees. 

Ms. Mosqueda advises that the Director of DPW has 
determined that it is at best extremely difficult to retain 
necessary consultants and contractors to assist the City m 
this emergency, given the existence of the dangerous 
conditions at Clayton Street, without indemnifying such 
consultants and contractors. 

Budget: The total estimated project cost is $347,500, including 

$275,000 for construction services (see Attachment I), 
500 for design services and $30,000 for DPW costs. 
Attachment II provided by Ms. Mosqueda contains the 
budget details for the total estimated project costs of 
$347,500. 

Comments: 1. As previously mentioned, on July 30, 1998, the DPW 

declared that an emergency existed at Clayton Street. 
Ms. Mosqueda explains that the DPW could not initiate 
expedited contract procedures for the emergency work in 
accordance with Administrative Code Section 6.30 until 
DPW officials confirmed that the City would assume 
responsibility for reconstruction of the retaining wall. 
Ms. Mosqueda advises that the DPW is now requesting 
approval from the Board of Supervisors to initiate 
expedited contract procedures for the emergency work 
because the dangerous conditions at Clayton Street may 
worsen if such work is not completed before the start of 
the approaching rainy season. According to Ms. 
Mosqueda, if the proposed resolution is approved, the 
DPW intends to solicit bids for the emergency work on 
September 21, 1998, and award the construction contract 
to the lowest bidder in early October of 1998. 

2. According to Mr. Lyndon Chee of the City Attorney's 
Office, the City is already liable for claims arising from 
the failure of the retaining wall at Clayton Street. Mr. 
Chee points out that if the proposed resolution is 
approved, the City will continue to assume the same 
amount of liability regarding the retaining wall at 
Clayton Street with the exception that the City cannot be 
held liable for claims arising from the gross negligence or 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

willful misconduct of the consultants and contractors 
hired to perform the emergency work. 

3. The resolution incorrectly identifies (in one instance) 
the location of the emergency at Clayton Street as 
between Twin Peaks Boulevard and Greystone Terrace. 
The resolution should be amended to substitute such 
reference with the actual location of the emergency at 
Clayton Street between Corbett Avenue and Pemberton 
Place. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



SEP 09 '98 03:38PM CCSF, DPW, BOE. PROJECT MANAGEMENT 



P. 3 

ATTACHMENT I 



CLAYTON STREET RETAINING WALL RECONSTRUCTION 
JOB NO. 1692N 
ESTIMATE OF BID PRICES 
SEPTEMBER 9, 1998 



Bid 

Item 

No. 


Bid Item 


Estimated 
Quantity 


Unit 


Unit Pnce 


Amoun: 


1 


Trencn and Excavation for Sewer Work 




Lump 
Sum 


S2.0C0 


S2.C0C 


2 


Precast Concrete Catcnoasm with Frame 
and Grating per SFDPW Standard Plan 
LL- 18,039.1 Ch. 8 


1 


Each 


S3. 500 


S3. 500 


3 


10-Inch VCP Cuiver. 


s 


L F 


HOC 


32;:: 


4 


8-lncn VCP Side Sewer 


18 


LF. 


180 


$1 440 


5 


6-Inch VCP Cleanout Riser 


Ifl 


LF. 


svd 


51/20 


6 


New Wall Including Excavaticn and 
Backfill 




Lump 

Sum 




5195,000 


7 


Traffic Routing 




Lump 
Sum 


525. C0C 


S25.000 


8 


Sidewalk ana Curb Repair 




Allcw 


$10,540 


|19 7cz 
















Subtotal 








S250.00C 
















10% Contingency 






525 fJOC 


sis :::■ 
















TOTAL 








S275.O0O 1 



15 



SEP 09 '58 03:37PM CCSF, DPW, BOE, PROJECT MANAGEMENT 

City and County of San Francisco 

ATTACHMENT II 
Fas-e 1 or 2 




Willie Lewis Brown, Jr., Mayo? 
Mark A. Primeau, AIA, Diredcr and City Architect 




P.l 

(415)556-4021 

FAX (415)556-4513 

http://www.sfdpw.com 



Department of Public Works 

Project Management Division 

30 Van Ness Avenue, 5* n Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94102-6020 

Kathryn How, Assistant City Engineer 



September 9, 1998 

Mr. Gabriel Cabrera, Budget Analyst 
Board of Supervisors 
1390 Market Street, Suite 1025 
San Francisco, CA 94102 

Subject: File 98-1378 

Dear Mr. Cabrera: 



Post-it* Fax Note 




Pursuant to your request, the following is the detailed breakdown of our projected estimate to perform 
the necessary emergency work to stabilize and repair the retaining wall on Clayton Street at Pemberton 
Place. 

ESTIMATE OF PROJECT COSTS: 



DESCRIPTION 


HOURS 


RATE 


SUBTOTAL] 


TOTAL 


A (EMERGENCY CONTRACT-CONSTRUCTION* 




Lump 


S250,000 






10 % Contingency 






S25,000 






Contractor to be determined 










)* See attached breakdown 








5275,000 


B IBUREAU OF ENGINEERING (Design Services) 










|Structural Section 










ll) Engineer 


111 


72 


S7,992 




12) Draftsperson 


150 


49 


57,350 




|3) Section Manager 


50 


85 


54,250 




iHydraulics Section 










|1) Engineer 


20 


72 


81,440 




|2) Draftsperson 


24 


±9 


$1,176 






3) Section Manager 


4 


85 


5340 






Streets and Highways 










|l) Engineer 


102 


60 


56,120 




|2) Draftsperson 


48 


49 


52.352 




J3) Section Manager 


4 


85 


5340 




IContract Preparation 










11) Engineer 


50 


72 


S3, 600 




|2) Section Manager 


4 


85 


S340 




IProject Management 


72 


72 


$5,184 




Traffic Eneineering 


28 


72 


S2.016 




1 


1 




S42300 



'IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN SAN FRANCISCO" We are dedicatee tnctivtauals committed to teamworK. 
customer service and continuous Improvement m partnership with the community- 
Customer Service Teamwork Continuous Improvement 



15 



SEP 09 '98 03:38PM CCSF, DPU, BOE, PROJECT MANAGEMENT 

Mr Gabriel Cabrera 
Budget Analyst 
Sept. 9, 1998 
Page 2 



P. 2 

ATTACHMENT II 
Page 2 of 2 



c 


BUREAU OF CONSTRUCTION 
MANAGEMENT 










IConstruclion Manager 


40 


95 


53,800 




|Resident Engineer 


316 


T"! 


$22,752 




ISenior Clerk Typist 


9 


••: 


S3 7 8 




iMateriali Testing Laboratory 




Lump 


S3,070 




[ 








S30.000 











If you have any further questions, please contact me at (4 IS) 558-4039. 
Sincerely yours. 

Judi Mosqueda 
Project Management 
Department of Public Works 

Attachment 

cc. Fernando Cisneros 
Susan Yee 



17 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 2 



File 98-1176 



Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of August 
5, 1998. 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Department of Human Resources (DHR) 
Department of Transportation 

Ordinance authorizing the settlement of a pay grievance 
of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi filed against the City pursuant 
to the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers. Local 21. AFL-CIO, in the amount of 
S16,826.50. 

The proposed ordinance would approve a settlement 
against the City in the amount of S16,826.50 for a 
grievance filed on behalf of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi by the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21. 

According to Mr. Geoffrey Rothman, of DHR, Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired by the Department of 
Transportation as a 5202 Junior Civil Engineer at Step 1 
on March 29, 1994 and worked at Step 1 for the period 
March 29. 1994 through November 17, 1995. According to 
Mr. Rothman, as stated in his attached memorandum of 
July 22, 1998. "At the time of her [Ms. Mahmoudi's] offer 
of employment she was informed that she could be 
appointed above the entrance rate of Step 1 if she 
provided records documenting that she would experience 
a loss of compensation if she was appointed at Step 1. Ms. 
Mahmoudi submitted the required documentation to the 
Department of Transportation to justify an appointment 
to Step 5. No action was initiated by the department to 
request approval of the Step 5 appointment." 

The annual salary at Step 5 of a 5202 Junior Civil 
Engineer position as of March 29, 1994 when Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired was $44,970 or $7,882 higher than 
the annual salary of $37,088 at Step 1. On November 18, 
1995, Ms. Mahmoudi was promoted to classification 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer at Step 3 and worked at Step 3 
for the period November 18, 1995 through August 11, 
1997. If her promotion to the 5204 Assistant Civil 
Engineer position had been based on Step 5 of a 5202 
Junior Civil Engineer position. Ms. Mahmoudi would 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

18 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



have been promoted to Step 4 of the 5204 Assistant Civil 
Engineer position instead of to Step 3 of the 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer position. As of November 18, 
1995, the date of her promotion, the annual salary at Step 
4 of a 5204 Assistant Civil Engineer position was $48,598 
or $2,766 higher than the $45,832 annual salary at the 
Step 3 salary which Ms. Mahmoudi received. 

Article III.3.G-Appointment Above Entrance Rate of the 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21 states that, "Appointments may be 
made by an appointing officer at any Step in the 
compensation schedule upon the approval of the Human 
Resources Director under one or more of the following 
conditions: a) A former permanent City employee, 
following resignation with service satisfactory, is being 
reappointed to a permanent position in his/her former 
classification, b) loss of compensation would result if 
appointee accepts position at the normal Step, c) a severe, 
easily demonstrated and documented recruiting and 
retention problem exists, d) the appointee possessed 
special experience, qualifications, and/or skills including, 
but not limited to, the number of years performing similar 
work elsewhere which, in the Appointing Officer's opinion, 
warrants appointment above the entrance rate, e) to be 
considered, requests for adjustments under the provisions 
of this Section must be received in the offices of the 
Department of Human Resources not later than the end of 
the fiscal year in which the appointment is made, and f) 
when the Human Resources Director approves 
appointments of all new hires in a classification at a Step 
above the entrance rate, the Human Resource Director 
may advance to that Step incumbents in the same 
classification who are below that Step." 

On behalf of Ms. Mahmoudi, Local 21. AFL-CIO filed a 
grievance against the City in July. 1996 asserting 
violation of Article III.3.G-Appointment Above Entrance 
Rate of the MOU. 

In his July 22, 1998 memorandum. Mr. Rothman stated, 
"Ms. Mahmoudi inquired regarding the status of the 
request (to be appointed at a higher Step when she was 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

first hired by the Department of Transportation) shortly 
after she was hired and was provided with inaccurate 
information by a former supervisor that resulted in her 
belief that an adjustment to her salary Step was no longer 
possible. However, Ms. Mahmoudi raised the issue again 
a year later when she became aware that two new hires in 
the 5202 class were advised that they could be eligible for 
an appointment above the entrance rate. As a 
consequence, Ms. Mahmoudi inquired as to the 
misinformation given to her and again requested her 
appointment retroactively to the higher Step. The 
Department then submitted a request to the Department 
of Human Resources, now two years later, for the Step 5 
appointment." 

However, Mr. Rothman stated in his memorandum, 
"Requests for appointment above the entrance rate in 
order to be considered must be received either prior to 
appointment or at least within the same fiscal year of 
appointment. Therefore, the request was untimely and 
was denied by the Department of Human Resources." 

However, at this time the Department of Human 
Resources is recommending approval of this subject 
settlement to grant Ms. Mahmoudi a settlement of 
$16,826.50 because, as Mr. Rothman states in his 
memorandum, "In view of the facts and circumstances 
provided by Ms. Mahmoudi and by the union, the 
Department of Human Resources is recommending 
approval of this settlement." 

Comments: 1. The Budget Analyst has found that the original 

calculation of $16,826.50, as determined by the 
Department of Transportation, is in error and that the 
correct amount is $13,936.79. The Department of Human 
Resources and the Department of Transportation are in 
agreement. 

2. Ms. Vicki Clayton of the City Attorney's Office advises 
that if the Board of Supervisors does not approve the 
proposed ordinance, the dispute would be decided by an 
arbitrator. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
20 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

3. The information in this report is based upon the 
settlement agreement originally submitted by the 
Department of Human Resources. Ms. Paula Schiff of the 
Department of Human Resources advises that a new 
settlement agreement is being negotiated with the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers. According to Ms. Schiff, this new agreement 
has not yet been finalized, therefore the Department has 
requested that this item be continued for one week. 

Recommendations: Continue the proposed resolution for one week, as 
requested by the Department. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 




Attachment 



Department of Human Resources 



July 22, 1998 



ANDREA R. GCUROINS 
HJWA.N RESOURCES 01RE-— 3R 



Ksrvey Rose 

ooard of SuDcrvisors* Budcet Analyst 
L 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1998 

- Geoffrey Rochrraan ? 'v. 

Employee Reiadcras Director Item 3- Fi le 98-11 7fi 

Re: Panes Mahmoudi Serdement 
File No. SS-1176 

Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi was hired 23 a class 5202 Jr. Civil Engineer on March 29 1 99a 

Ac me Tame of her offer cf employment she was informed that she couid be accoinccd 
acove the entrance rare of step 1 if she provided records documenting that she would 
ex P<~ence a loss of compensation if she was appointed at step 1. Ms. Mahmoudi 
submitted the required documentation to the Department of Transportation to justify an 
appointment to step 5. No acdon was initiated by the department to recues: approval c r 
die step 5 appointment. 

Ms. Mahmoudi inquired regarding the status of the request shortly after she was hire' 
— c was provided with inaccurate information by a former su-er>dsor that resulted •- '--- 

however, Ms. Mahraoudi raised the issue again a year later when she became awar" -h=' 
iwq new hares into the 5202 class were advised that they could be eligible for an 
appointment above the entrance "ate 

As a consequence, Ms.'Mahmoudi inquired as to the rnisinforrnaden siven to he- and 

agaan requested her appointment rcroacdveiy to the higher step. 

i.wc years later, for the seen 5 accoir.trr.cat. 



ltrance rare in order to be considered must he 



Requests for appointment above th 

appointment. Therefore, the request was uncirneiy and was denied by the Denanmem n - 
human Resources. 

— "- '-—, i-ocai 21 then filed a grievance on behalf of Ms. Mahmcudi with the Decai — - 

of Human Resources. 



En view cf die facts and circurr 



cccc prcv-ded by Ms. Mahmoudi and by the ardor th 



^ 3cc;n Sl-»»< • Sin r.-ir-cisia. Ci 3-na;.:: 

21a 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 3 - File 98-1424 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Description: 



Mayor's Office 

Ordinance (a) approving the form of and authorizing the 
execution and delivery by the City and County of San 
Francisco of: (1) an amended and restated equipment 
lease; and, (2) an equipment lease Supplement No. 7 each 
between the City and County of San Francisco Finance 
Corporation, as lessor, and the City and County of San 
Francisco, as lessee, with respect to equipment to be used 
for City purposes and providing for the related Certificate 
of Approval and of a continuing Disclosure Certificate; (b) 
approving the issuance of lease revenue bonds by said 
nonprofit corporation in an amount not to exceed 
$11,500,000; (c) providing for reimbursement to the City 
of certain City expenditures incurred prior to the issuance 
of lease revenue bonds; (d) providing for the execution of 
documents in connection therewith and (e) ratifying 
actions previously taken. 

Not to exceed $11,500,000 

In June of 1990, San Francisco voters approved 
Proposition C, a Charter amendment which authorized 
the Board of Supervisors to authorize and approve the 
lease-financing of equipment purchases for the City 
through a nonprofit corporation, the San Francisco 
Finance Corporation. The equipment leased by the City 
is purchased by the San Francisco Finance Corporation 
with the proceeds of lease revenue bonds. 

According to Ms. Laura Opsahl of the Mayor's Office of 
Public Finance, the City has issued lease revenue bonds 
for the procurement of equipment on an annual basis 
since FY 1990-91 with the exception of FY" 1996-97 when 
such issuance was delayed until the following fiscal year. 
Ms. Opsahl reports that in FY 1997-98, the City issued 
lease revenue bonds for both FY' 1996-97 and FY* 1997-98. 
The Mayor's Office is now requesting authorization to 
issue up to $11,500,000 in lease revenue bonds to 
purchase equipment included in the FY" 1998-99 budget. 






BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Interest rates on lease revenue bonds issued by nonprofit 
corporations are generally lower than the interest on 
other financing instruments, because of the tax-exempt 
status of investments in non-profit corporations. 

Proposition C requires that the San Francisco Finance 
Corporation may not issue lease revenue bonds for 
equipment purchase unless the Controller certifies that 
the interest costs to the City will be lower through the 
San Francisco Finance Corporation than through the 
other financing instruments. 

According to the Controller, the other major financing 
instrument is third party vendors that act as a bank and 
provide equipment to the City, and the City in turn 
makes payments to such vendors. These third party 
vendors include AT&T Credit Corporation and GE 
Capital. 

Under the proposed ordinance, the Controller is required 
to certify that the interest rates are lower through the 
San Francisco Finance Corporation prior to the sale of the 
proposed lease revenue bonds. 

In accordance with Proposition C, the total outstanding 
indebtedness of the San Francisco Finance Corporation 
may not exceed a principal amount of $20 million at any 
given time beginning in FY 1990-91, with the limit 
increasing by five percent in each subsequent fiscal year. 
The maximum amount of authorized outstanding 
indebtedness in FY 1998-99 is $29,549,109. 

The Board of Supervisors previously authorized the 
issuance by the San Francisco Finance Corporation of up 
to $62,069,707 in lease revenue bonds (of which 
$56,480,000 was actually issued) to finance the purchase 
of equipment, as follows: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Fiscal Year 



Authorized 

Lease Revenue Bonds 



1990-91 




$7,304,707 


1991-92 


Up to 


10,000,000 


1992-93 


Up to 


10,200,000 


1993-94 


Up to 


7,000,000 


1994-95 


Up to 


6,500,000 


1995-96 


Up to 


7,065,000 


1996-97 







1997-98 


Up to 


14.000.000 



TOTAL 



Up to S62,069,70 r 



As noted above, the San Francisco Finance Corporation 
was authorized to issue up to $62,069,707 since FY 1990- 
91, in lease revenue bonds to procure equipment on behalf 
of the City. According to the Mayor's Office of Public 
Finance, the actual amount of lease revenue bonds issued 
by the San Francisco Finance Corporation, the amounts 
which have been repaid, and the outstanding 
indebtedness as of October 1, 1998, will be as follows: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2k 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Series 199 1A Bonds 

Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds Issued ST, 020, 000 

Repayment to date 7,020.000 

Outstanding Indebtedness: Series 1991A: SO. 00 

Series 1992A Bonds 

Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds Issued S5, 555, 000 

Repayment to date 4.945.000 

Outstanding Indebtedness: Series 1992A: 610,000 

Series 1993A Bonds 

Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds Issued S10.200.000 

Repayment to date 9,670,000 

Outstanding Indebtedness: Series 1993A: 530,000 

Series 1994A Bonds 

Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds Issued S6. 850, 000 

Repayment to date 5,870.000 

Outstanding Indebtedness: Series 1994A: 980.000 

Series 1995A Bonds 

Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds Issued S6, 075, 000 

Repayment to date 5.540.000 

Outstanding Indebtedness: Series 1995A: 535,000 

Series 1996A Bonds 

Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds Issued S7, 065, 000 

Repayment to date 5.075.000 

Outstanding Indebtedness: Series 1996A: 1,990.000 

Series 1997A Bonds 513,715,000 

Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds Issued 1.655.000 

Payment to date 

Outstanding Indebtedness: Series 1997A: 12.060.000 

Total Current Outstanding Indebtedness S 16.705.000 

Total Allowable Indebtedness S29.549.109 

Total Allowable Indebtedness Still Available S 12.844. 109 

The current, unused balance of lease financing available 
in FY 1998-99 in accordance with the provisions of 
Proposition C is S12.S44.109 (Proposition C established a 
limit of $29,549,109 in available indebtedness for FY 
1998-99 less the current outstanding balance of 
$16,705,000). The proposed ordinance would authorize 
the issuance of new lease revenue bonds in FY 1998-99 in 
an amount not to exceed SI 1.500,000, which is within the 
San Francisco Finance Corporation's current unused debt 
capacity under Proposition C of S12.S44.109. Ms. Opsahl 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

25 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



estimates that the bonds will be sold on a competitive 
basis on October 1, 1998. 

The proposed ordinance would also authorize an 
Equipment Lease Supplement No. 7 between the City and 
the San Francisco Finance Corporation for the City's lease 
purchase of additional equipment purchased with 
proceeds of the new lease revenue bonds. 

According to Ms. Opsahl, the bond trustee for the San 
Francisco Finance Corporation will act as a bank for 
equipment purchases. Ms. Opsahl explains that various 
City departments have budgeted the annual lease 
payment within their FY 1998-99 departmental budgets. 
Ms. Opsahl reports that the amount of the annual lease 
payments for the proposed lease revenue bonds in FY 
1998-99 is approximately $442,511, and a total of 
$12,234,023, including FY 1998-99 lease payments, for 
the equipment would be paid over the seven year term of 
the leases. All of the approximately $12,234,023 would be 
funded from previously budgeted General Fund lease 
payment appropriations approved by the Board of 
Supervisors. Ms. Opsahl reports that pending 

authorization of the proposed ordinance, the San 
Francisco Finance Corporation will sell bonds to 
prospective investors and will subsequently purchase the 
equipment on behalf of the City using the proceeds from 
the lease revenue bond funds. City departments will then 
make annual lease payments to the San Francisco 
Finance Corporation, which in turn will use these funds 
to repay the lease revenue bond interest and redemption. 

In addition, the proposed ordinance provides for (a) 
reimbursement to the City of certain expenditures prior to 
the issuance of the proposed additional lease revenue 
bonds, (b) the execution of documents needed to 
implement the proposed ordinance, and (c) the ratification 
of actions previously taken. 

The annual budgets of City departments must include the 
amount of the City's annual lease-purchase payments 
(including principal and interest) for equipment procured 
through the San Francisco Finance Corporation. Since 
these payments are required under the terms of the lease- 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

purchase agreement with the San Francisco Finance 
Corporation, the annual payments become fixed costs of 
City departments for the term of the lease revenue bond 
repayment period, once the equipment has been procured 
and acquired by the San Francisco Finance Corporation. 
As noted above, City departments will make lease 
payments to the San Francisco Financing Corporation, 
which in turn will use such funds to repay the bond funds. 

Comments: 1. The attachment to this report shows the equipment 

lease purchase items, with a total cost of $11,002,758 
included in the FY 1998-99 City budget that would be 
funded by the proposed lease revenue bonds. The 
estimated budget of the proposed, (not to exceed) 
$11,500,000 in lease revenue bonds is as follows: 

Equipment Costs $9,343,776 

Required Reserve Fund 1 1,097,000 

Bond Issuance Costs 191,910 

Capitalized Interest 2 337,314 

Accrued Interest 32,758 

Total $11,002,758 

2. The actual interest costs to the City of the proposed 
equipment lease-purchases cannot be determined 
precisely, because the interest rate will depend on 
prevailing financial market interest rates when the bonds 
are actually sold. Interest costs will also vary for each 
equipment item purchased based on the number of years 
in the repayment period for the item, which cannot exceed 
the useful life of the equipment. 

3. Ms. Opsahl estimates that, if Series 1998A lease 
revenue bonds are sold in a principal amount of 
approximately $10,970,000 at an estimated annual 



1 Lease Revenue bonds have a legally required Reserve Fund equal, in this case, to 10 percent of the 
principal amount of the bonds. 

2 Pursuant to State law, the City cannot make any interest payments on lease revenue bonds until 
the City has received the equipment. However, interest on the lease revenue bonds begins accruing 
when the bonds are sold regardless of when the equipment is eventually purchased and received by 
the City. Therefore, capitalized interest, estimated in the amount of S33T.314. must be paid from 
proceeds of the bonds until such a time as the equipment is actually received by the City and interest 
payments can be made from funds appropriated in the City budget. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



interest rate of 4.3 percent (based on current financial 
market interest rates) and based on the expected 
repayment period of seven years, the City's total principal 
and interest cost would be approximately $12,234,023 
over the life of the bonds. Based on these estimates, the 
City's total costs over the life of the bonds would be 
$10,970,000 in principal and $1,264,023 in interest costs. 

4. The proposed ordinance would provide for a Continuing 
Disclosure Agreement. According to Ms. Opsahl, Federal 
law requires that all cities and counties, which issue tax- 
exempt debt, file an Annual Report with a national 
repository for the benefit of the investors. The Annual 
Report would contain the following: (1) the financial 
statements of the San Francisco Financing Corporation 
and the City; (2) the status of the project (e.g. equipment 
purchase and repayment amounts); (3) a summary of 
budgeted General Fund revenues and appropriations; (4) 
a summary of assessed valuation of taxable property and 
(5) a summary of outstanding and authorized but 
unissued tax supported debt. 

5. The use of lease financing is equivalent to borrowing 
funds, with resultant interest costs, to purchase 
equipment. Since such financing requires fixed, 
mandatory lease payments by City departments over 
several years, the use of lease-purchases "locks-in" 
departmental expenditures for future years resulting in a 
reduction in the amount of discretionary monies in the 
City's budget in future years. However, the Mayor's 
Office recommends the use of lease-financing with 
Proposition C bonds for the City's major equipment 
purchases in order to spread the cost over several years, 
corresponding to the City's beneficial use of the 
equipment. 

6. According to John Madden, Assistant Controller, the 
Controller has certified that the interest costs to the City 
would be lower through the San Francisco Financing 
Corporation than through other financing instruments. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



SENT BY: 



9-10-98 ; 2:00PM 



MAYOR'S OFFICE- 



415 252 0461;;? 2/ 4 



Attachment 
Page 1 of 1 



DO ON Oa On On On On 



,0\ ^ P* (J» 



go — cc 






w* w, O 



— ^ CN 



O" On On On On 
OOVOVO — — © — 

(S| (S — — i V 



Os C\ O/v ON 



o o r- 



© c c o 



On O -o — w-i 



CI On r~) 



~- sO r^ r* ir, 
Wi 00 r^ *0 CM 



= 3 £ 



O Ov m r^i VI 
o* — rs n v> 
m n — <S 



- 


- 


- 


!"• 


VS 


■ 


■ 


C 


ee 


— 


- 


mm 


o 


- 


- 


- 


be 


CTv 




C 










n 


a 


o 


w 


- 


Cs 




-r 


c 


r 


IN 


*~i 


n 




■z 


PN 


c 


c 


— . 


\r> 


<• 


r- 


IT 


r< 


\0 


c< 


t/-, 


a 


•i 




-. 


In 


» 


m 


m 


-j 


r*i 


N 




a 


- 



<N (N — (N (N 



— _ _ tM r-t 



rs (N (N 



— a, v 

< 8 -§ 
~ 7 -S 



in 

C O u 

< U Z 



> 

M 
.§ 

< I 

s e 



e S 
<3 > 



I 1 

£ < 



I I 



w u > 



— ^ 



e* £ 1 



r 

£ cj z a :: u 



i-. _ C5 c 



— . K i— 



I & . 

,R td -S Xi 

■v ^ - - 

y « u d 

?. D o. U 



a. b 



C_ C 



H — 



If 
3 £ 



a .i >. „ 
«i c = _ 

CI < CJ u. 



■ - 2 



29 



Attachment 
Page 2 ot 3 



OO OO OO Cs ON os 



OS Os Os <7< OS 
ON Os OS Os O* 
|/S v~l ^ <Ti VN 



ON OS OS On On 



Os O Os ON On ON 



^n irs ~-< — . 



rs CN rN — 



cs {N r>l oi (M rs 



c-i rl cn r^ 



<S (N tN n3 



^j m <n n n «*» pi 



m fi r*i <n 



m r*s. fn o en 



m rn m m 



OO — © "T fN 



«n r~ ^> 



IN M N !~l M IN 



O O 'A 



o o © 



g § 



© o o © 

O O o © 
© © O O 



O so rs 



fN oo — in ^ ■ cn c*> <n 



fN CN CN (s CN fN rs] 



in t** cs 



r""l — CN — 



n r - n - 



5 




















c 








* 






D 








D 






j* 




c 




_^ 


^ 




. 




c 




o 


E 




o 

c3 




o" 




fl 


& 


t- 


>' 


<U 


g 




C 


5 


| 


U 


> 




a 
U 


J 
c 

-. 


o 
h 


c 


c 




3 
9 


Q. 




CJ 


1- 


fN 


a 


O 



,_ ^ _< .s 



— — q. H 









n • a 



2. z £• M 



a. •— o 



H S 

"i £ 



Oi N ""> 



— O X '- b. 



£ o 



5 > 

BO 

5 

I 



3. ft 



30 



SENT BY: 



9-10-98 ; 2:00PM 



MAYOR'S OFFICE- 



415 252 0461 I* 4/ 4 

Attachment 
Page 3 of 3 



S £ 



«0 O V> 






r*"l f*^ rM r"l 



O O v> {N vo 
in v-» rr\ rs — 



J> .S 



2 5 



»-J 


"0 


c 


c 


g 


-) 


& 


'5 


|2 


5 


g 


s 


- 




-=*■ 


T 


■e 


p 


a 


£ 


m 


— 


3 


- 



H <* 



31 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 4 - File 98-1366 



Department: 
Item: 

Description: 



Controller 

Resolution establishing the City and County's 
appropriations limit for FY 1998-99 pursuant to Article 
XIII B of the California Constitution. 

The proposed resolution would establish $1,393,845,379 
as the 1998-99 adjusted appropriation limit or Gann 
spending limit for the City and County of San Francisco 
as required by Article XIII B of the California 
Constitution. 

On November 6, 1979, California voters approved 
Proposition 4, known as the Gann Initiative, which added 
Article XIII B to the California Constitution. Article XIII 
B limits the growth of appropriations from the proceeds of 
taxes of the State of California and local governments to 
the percentage of change in population and the lesser of 
the percentage change in the cost of living or in per capita 
personal income. The State Government Code requires 
that each local government establish its appropriation 
limit (Gann Limit) by resolution each year. 

The Controller has computed the 1998-99 Gann Limit for 
the City and County of San Francisco as follows 
(percentages and computed amount have been rounded by 
the Controller): 



199/ -98 Gross Gann Limit 

Adjusted by: 

Increase in Cost of Living 

Increase in Population 



51,311,807. 1SS 



4.15% 
2.02% 



1998-99 Net Gann Limit $1,393,845,379* 

*1.0415 times 1.0202 equals 1.0625383 times $1,311,807,188. 

The Controller's Office monitors revenues affected by the 
Gann Limit throughout the year. At year-end, a final 
computation is prepared comparing actual proceeds of taxes 
to the Gann Limit. At that time, two tests must be met. 
First, all actual proceeds of taxes must be below the Gann 
Limit; and second, all actual proceeds of taxes collected 

Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 
32 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

must be appropriated. If either test is not met. according to 
Article XIII B, excess revenues collected must be returned 
to the taxpayers within two years. 

The amount appropriated in the City's FY 1998-99 budget 
that is subject to the Gann Limit is SI, 178,512,835 which is 
$215,332,544 less than the net 1998-99 Net Gann Limit of 
$1,393,845,379. In accordance with the Annual 
Appropriation Ordinance, any 1998-99 tax proceeds in 
excess of current estimates will be appropriated to the 
City's General Fund General Reserve, which is used as a 
revenue source (a) to fund supplemental appropriations 
during the current fiscal year and (b) to fund the City's 
budget for the next fiscal. 

Comments: 1. The Gann Limit was first applied in 1980-81 using the 

actual 1978-79 appropriations that would have been 
subject to the limit, had it existed then, as the base year 
(as called for by Article XIII B of the California 
Constitution). The 1978-79 base was adjusted for changes 
in per capita personal income, cost of living and 
population to obtain the 1980-81 limit. In each successive 
: the prior year's limit was used as the base for 
computation of the new limit. 

2. State Proposition 111, approved by the voters in June 
1990, made several changes to the Article XIII B (3) which 
are reflected in the City's computations including an 
adjustment to exclude appropriations for "Qualified 
capital outlay as defined by the legislature" from proceeds 
of taxes. This results in a reduction of S29,681,989 for FY 
1998-99, from appropriations of proceeds of taxes subject 
to the limit. 

3. Based on the City Attorney's memorandum of opinion 
of June 14, 1988, the City is excluding Court and Federal 
mandates from appropriations subject to the 
appropriations limit. The City Attorney's Office has 
previously advised that the exclusion of Court and 
Federal mandates is consistent with the meaning of 
Article XIII B. No previous legal challenges have been 
filed questioning this interpretation. The two mandates 
for FY 1998-99 totaling 540,592.653. that are identified by 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

33 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

a survey of all City departments and verified by the 
Controller's Office, are as follows: 

Police Consent Decree S 36,344,389 

Federal Resource Conservation Act (Toxics) 4.248.264 

Total Court and Federal Mandates $ 40,592,653 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

34 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items 5. 6 and 7 - Files 98-1404. 98-1405 and 98-1406 

The proposed ordinances would establish the Fiscal Year 1998-99 Property 
Tax rates for the City and County of San Francisco including the Bay Area Air 
Quality Management District and the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (File 98- 
1404), for the San Francisco Unified School District (File 98-1405) and for the San 
Francisco Community College District (File 98-1406s). The Property Tax rate 
proposed for the City and County of San Francisco is SI. 00 per S100 of assessed 
valuation which is the maximum allowable rate. The total Property Tax rate of 
$1,165 per $100 of assessed valuation for Fiscal Year 1998-99 for all of the 
jurisdictions named above, as calculated by the Controller, includes bond interest 
and redemption charges. The proposed Fiscal Year 1998-99 Property Tax rate of 
$1,165 is a decrease of SO. 025 from the Fiscal Year 1997-98 Tax rate of SI. 190. The 
Controller's Office reports that the decrease in the Property Tax rate for Fiscal Year 
1998-99 reflects lower debt service requirements for the City's General Obligation 
Bonds, as well as San Francisco Unified School District and Bay Area Rapid Transit 
District bonded indebtedness. 

The Fiscal Year 1997-98 approved Property Tax rates and the Fiscal Year 
1998-99 proposed Property Tax rates are as follows: 



General Tax Rates 

Citv and County of San Francisco: 
General Fund 
Children's Fund 
Open Space Acquisition Fund 
County Superint. of Schools 
Library Preservation Fund 
S.F. Unified School District 
S.F. Community College District 
Bay Area Air Quality Management 

District 
Bay Area Rapid Transit District 
Subtotal, General Fund Tax Rate 

Rates for Bonded Indebtedness 

City and County of San Francisco 
S. F. Unified School District 
Bay Area Rapid Transit District 
Subtotal, Bonded Indebtedness 



Approved 


Proposed 




Fiscal Year 


Fiscal Year 




1997-98 


1998-99 


Increase 


Rates 


Rates 


(Decrease") 


0.57739620 


0.57739620 




0.02500000 


0.02500000 


- 


0.02500000 


0.02500000 


- 


0.00097335 


0.00097335 


- 


0.02500000 


0.02500000 


- 


0.28485725 


0.28485725 


- 


0.05336253 


0.05336253 


- 


0.00208539 


0.00208539 


- 


0.0063252S 


0.00632528 


_ 


SI. 00 


SI. 00 


S0.00 


S 0.16380174 


S 0.14493925 


S(0.018S6249) 


0.00369826 


0.00338075 


(0.00031751) 


0.02250000 


0.01668000 


(0.00582000^ 


S 0.190 


S 0.165 


S (0.025) 



Total Combined Tax Rate 



S 1.190 






BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



S 1.165 



S (0.025) 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



As compared with the current Fiscal Year 1997-98 Property Tax rate of 
$1,190, the Fiscal Year 1998-99 proposed $1,165 Property Tax rate will have the 
following effect on a tax bill for a single family residence assessed at $400,000: 

Fiscal Year 
1997-98 

Assessed Value $400,000 

Less Homeowners Exemption 7.000 

Total $393,000 divided by $100 x $1,190 = $4,676.70 



Fiscal Year 
1998-99 

Assessed Value (1997-98) $400,000 

Add 2% Cost of Living Increase 8,000 

Subtotal $408,000 

Less Homeowners Exemption 7.000 

Total $401,000 divided by $100 x $1,165 = $4.671.65 

Net Decrease in Property Tax Bill for Fiscal Year 1998-99 (S5.05) 



As shown above, homeowners of a single family residence, assessed at $400,000, 
would experience a cost of living increase of 2 percent, as allowed under Proposition 
13 for Fiscal Year 1998-99. In the example reflected above, the cost of living 
increase, combined with the decreased rate for bonded indebtedness, results in a 
Property Tax decrease of $5.05 for Fiscal Year 1998-99 as compared to Fiscal Year 
1997-98. 

Recommendation 

Approve the proposed ordinances. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 16, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 8 - File 98-1407 

The proposed ordinance would amend the previously approved Fiscal Year 
1998-99 Annual Appropriation Ordinance (AAO) as a prerequisite to the levy of the 
Property Tax rate. The proposed ordinance would make the following expenditure 
adjustment to the Fiscal Year 1998-99 AAO: 

Increase previously appropriated funds in the amount of $38,338 to the 
Art Commission for the Municipal Symphony Orchestra (one-eighth of one 
cent per $100 of assessed valuation) as required by Charter Section 
16.106(1). 

Comment 



The Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget included $770,000 for the Art Commission 
expenditures for the Municipal Symphony Orchestra. The proposed ordinance would 
increase this appropriation by $38,338 to $808,338 for Fiscal Year 1998-99. The 
proposed adjustment would have a net effect of decreasing the General Fund 
Reserve by $38,338 from $25,000,000 to $24,961,662. 



Recommendation 



Approve the proposed ordinance. 



Harvev M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 



Supervisor Yee 
Stephen Kawa 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

37 



itf/lf 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
MINUTES UU 

o zf SEP 2 4 1998 

V-*? , FINANCE COMMITTEE 

- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SAN FRAN £'T^y 

CITY AND COUNTY OF ^AN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRAHY 
■ RE GULAR MEETING 

WEDNESDAY. SEPTEMBER 23. 1998 - 1:00 P.M. VETERANS BUILDING 

401 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

ABSENT: Supervisor Kaufman 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

Meeting Commenced: 1:05 p.m. 

SPECIAL MEETING 

1. File 98-1479 . [Reserved Funds, DTIS] Hearing to consider 

release of reserved funds, Department of Telecommunications and 
Information Services, (fiscal year 1998-1999 budget) , in the 
amount of $1,000,000, to begin the implementation of the 
IBM/Tivoli Project, which will provide software and licensing 
for six departments to manage and maintain computer networks 
spread across multiple sites throughout the City. (Department 
of Telecommunications and Information Services) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Julia Friedlander, Acting 
Director, Dept. of Telecommunications & Information 
Services - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Release of $1,000,000 approved. Filed. 



VOTE WAS 2-0. WITH SUPERVISOR KAUFMAN ABSENT. 
Meeting Adjourned: 1: 15 p.m. 



Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn, Dept. 41 



1 
fa 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



S^AN 



12 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



BUDGET ANALYST 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SEP 2 2 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



September 18, 1998 
TO: .Finance Committee 

FROM: , Budget Analyst Rdc»~«.^-..«r ^ «««*-" 
SUBJECT: September 23, 1998 Special Finance Committee Meeting 
Item 1 - File 98-1479 



Department: Department of Telecommunications and Information Services 

(DTIS) 

Item: Hearing to consider the release of reserved funds in the 

Department of Telecommunications and Information Services 
FY 1998-99 budget in the amount of $1,000,000, to begin 
implementation of the IBM/Tivoli Project, which will provide 
software and licensing for seven departments initially, and 
eventually all City departments, to manage and maintain 
computer networks spread across multiple sites throughout the 
City. The seven departments for which the proposed 
implementation will begin in FY 1998-99 are: the Airport; the 
Public Utilities Commission; the Municipal Railway; the 
Department of Public Works; the Emergency Communications 
Department; the Controller; and, the Department of 
Telecommunications and Information Services. The total first 
year cost of IBM/Tivoli would be $1,275,123.36. The City's 
contract with IBM/Tivoli is a five-year agreement structured to 
provide sufficient software licensing to implement network 
management for all City departments. The full five year cost of 
the IBM/Tivoli software agreement, totals $7,250,617. 



Amount: 



$1,000,000 



Memo to the Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

Source of Funds: Funds reserved in the FY 1998-99 DTIS budget for the first 
phase of the implementation of the IBM/Tivoli Project as follows: 

Work Order Funds 

Interdepartmental Recoveries from the Airport, 
Municipal Railway (Grant Funds), Department of 
Public Works, Public Utilities Commission, 
Emergency Communications Department 

(Bond funds) $691,999 

DTIS (General Fund) 308.001 

Total $1,000,000 

Description: During the FY 1998-99 budget review, DTIS presented a request 

for $1,000,000 to fund the IBM/Tivoli Project. IBM/Tivoli has 
developed network management software that allows computer 
users with complex communication and networking 
requirements to manage computer systems centrally and across 
a variety of modes such as mainframes, Wide Area Networks 
and Local Area Networks. 

In June, 1998, when the Finance Committee was considering the 
FY 1998-99 budget, DTIS stated that negotiations with 
IBM/Tivoii had not been completed. Since DTIS was unable to 
provide complete information to the Budget Analyst during the 
FY 1998-99 budget review process, the Budget Analyst 
recommended that the Finance Committee place the $1,000,000 
request for the IBM/Tivoli project on reserve. The adopted FY 
1998-99 budget therefore included a reserve of the entire 
$1,000,000 pending additional information from DTIS on the 
benefits of IBM/Tivoli to the City and an estimate of the full cost 
of the project, including ongoing maintenance costs. 

According to Ms. Julia Friedlander, Acting Director of DTIS, 
IBM/Tivoli addresses a critical need for the City's information 
systems. Attachment I to this report provides a description of 
the benefits that will be achieved through implementation of 
IBM/Tivoli. 

Specific examples of improved operations that will be realized by 
the implementation of IBM/Tivoli are described below: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to the Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Special Finance Committee Meeting 



• Avoidance of downtime by monitoring the network to detect 
and diagnose potential problems and fixing them before they 
disrupt the network. 

• Reduction of downtime by speeding up the diagnosing and 
isolation of problems that have disrupted the network. 

• Minimizing the risk to the City arising from the installation 
of unlicensed software on City computers. 

• As Tivoli is implemented, DTIS network engineers and 
technicians will increasingly be able to solve network and 
user problems in advance, from a central location. This will 
reduce the number of emergency calls that require traveling 
to remote locations. 

Ms. Deborah Vincent-James of the Committee on Information 
Technology (COIT) states that COIT has recommended approval 
of the IBM/Tivoli Project. (See Attachment II, letter from COIT) 

DTIS now states that the total cost of the IBM/Tivoli Project 
would be $7,250,617 and would require a five-year 
implementation period. This amount includes software and 
licensing costs, finance charges, taxes and the cost of four years 
of maintenance and service agreements. 

According to Mr. Ed Colchado, Deputy Director for Network 
Engineering of DTIS, the contract between IBM/Tivoli and the 
City was signed by DTIS on June 24, 1998 (prior to release of 
the subject requested reserved funds of $1,000,000 by the 
Finance Committee). IBM had guaranteed the pricing structure 
of the agreement as long as it was signed prior to June 30, 1998. 
IBM/Tivoli has delivered the software, but according to Mr. 
Colchado, the City has not yet formally accepted delivery, and 
will not until DTIS is ready to begin installation and testing of 
the software. If the subject reserved funds are not released by 
the Finance Committee or the reserved appropriation is 
rescinded, the agreement between the City and IBM/Tivoli will 
be terminated, at no cost to the City, according to Mr. Robert 
Maerz, Deputy City Attorney. 

The agreement with IBM/Tivoli is expected to provide sufficient 
software licenses and maintenance services for all computer 
networks and desktop computers in all City departments. As 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Memo to the Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Special Finance Committee Meeting 



with all City contracts, the agreement is subject to the annual 
appropriation of funds by the Board of Supervisors. If, at any 
time, the City does not appropriate funds to pay for the 
IBM/Tivoli agreement on an annual basis, the agreement would 
be terminated at no additional cost to the City. 

The software agreement between the City and IBM/Tivoli 
provides for a total cost of $7,250,000, to be paid over a five year 
period. These costs have been detailed by DTIS as follows: 



Item Amount 

Software License Purchases $5,000,000 

Finance Charges 550,617 

Sales Taxes (8.5%) 425,000 
Five-Year Maintenance 

Service Agreement 1,275,000 

Total $7,250,617 

The financing agreement between the City and IBM Finance 
Corporation is for $5,875,617 (the $5,000,000 in software 
licenses, plus finance charges of $550,617 plus Sales Tax of 
$425,000 less a $100,000 down payment previously paid from 
FY 1997-98, unexpended DTIS funds. The financing 
agreement is structured over five years at an interest rate of 
4.47 percent. Over the five-year period, annual payments in 
the amount of $1,175,123.36 are scheduled on October first of 
each year, beginning in 1998. 

The $1,275,000 for the Five Year Maintenance Service 
Agreement costs would be paid from future DTIS annual 
budgets, with costs allocated to user departments, in the 
following amounts: 

Fiscal Year Amount Due 



1998-99 


$ 


1999-2000 


100,000 


2000-01 


250,000 


2001-02 


400,000 


2002-03 


525.000 


Total 


$1,275,000 


BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 





BUDGET ANALYST 

4 



Memo to the Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

As noted above, the funds that have been appropriated and 
reserved for the IBM/Tivoli project amount to $1,000,000 or 
$175,123.36 less than the amount of the first annual 
payment of $1,175,123.36. Ms. Friedlander has stated that 
the Department does not intend to request a FY 1998-99 
supplemental appropriation for the balance of $175,123.36. 
DTIS and COIT expect to identify funding for this balance 
from existing appropriations according to Ms. Friedlander. 

The DTIS would be responsible for administering and 
monitoring the IBM/Tivoli Project. The DTIS envisions a five- 
year implementation process, subject to the appropriation of 
funds in future annual budgets of the City. At the end of the 
five-year implementation period, DTIS anticipates that all 
major departments within the City would have the network 
management capabilities required to operate those networks 
with maximum efficiency. 

In addition to the $7,250,617 cost for the IBM/Tivoli Software 
Agreement discussed in this report, additional costs could 
result from special requests by City Departments for such 
items as additional professional and technical services or 
training beyond that provided by DTIS personnel. Such costs, 
if any, cannot be identified at this time according to Mr. 
Colchado. (See Comment 4, below). 

Comments: 1. IBM/Tivoli ' was selected as the City's choice for network 
management software under the same Request for Proposal 
competitive process, which secured the vendors for the new E911 
Emergency Communications System. According to Ms. Vincent-James 
and Mr. Colchado, TRW, the vendor which was awarded the E911 
contract, included IBM/Tivoli in its proposal as the network 
management software vendor. Due to the interest of other City 
departments in acquiring network management software, the 
members of COIT believed that all City departments could benefit 
from the technology offered by IBM/Tivoli and that implementing the 
system Citywide would allow the City to negotiate a better price on 
the software and licenses. Additionally, COIT believed that the City 
would benefit from a Citywide implementation of IBM/Tivoli, or some 
other network management tool. According to Mr. Colchado, DTIS 
estimates that if IBM/Tivoli software licenses were purchased at the 
"list price" for each of the City's estimated 200 to 300 network servers 
and estimated 12,000 desktop personal computers, the total cost 
would for software licensing alone would be approximately $8.8 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
5 



Memo to the Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

million, or $3.8 million more than the $5,000,000 cost of such software 
licenses specified in the agreement with IBM/Tivoli. 

2. Mr. Colchado states that the initial investment of $1,175,123.36 to 
implement the first phase of the IBM/Tivoli Project does not require 
the City to continue the planned implementation and incur the 
estimated cost of implementing the IBM/Tivoli System Citywide. An 
amendment to the contract, obtained by DTIS at the suggestion of the 
President of the Board of Supervisors, a member of the COIT, states 
that the City has one year to determine if IBM/Tivoli meets the 
operating capabilities in conformance with specific software 
documentation. If the City accepts IBM/Tivoli on or before the one- 
year period, then the remainder of the contract would be enforced, 
subject to the appropriation of funds in the City's annual budget. If 
the IBM/Tivoli software is returned to IBM because it does not 
operate in conformance with its specific software documentation (and 
IBM is unable to fix operating deficiencies) the City would be 
reimbursed for its initial investment. 

3. Mr. Colchado states that there are no additional hardware 
requirements associated with implementing IBM/Tivoli for the 
departments that will participate in the first year of the project. In 
future years, City Department's that decide to implement IBM/Tivoli 
will be expected to contribute work order funding to the DTIS to assist 
in paying for the annual cost of $1,175,123.36 for the software 
licensing and for annual maintenance costs, which as previously noted 
would total $1,275,000 over the five year period of the agreement. 

4. As of the writing of this report, the DTIS is unable to specify the 
future budget impact on individual General Fund and General Fund 
supported departments, but only that total annual payments for 
IBM/Tivoh will amount to $1,175,123.36 plus $1,275,000 for total 
maintenance costs over the five year term of the agreement. Such 
costs will be allocated to City department budgets, along with any 
additional costs for items requested by City Departments, such as 
additional professional and technical assistance and training. 
According to Ms. Friedlander and Mr. Harrington, Chair of COIT, the 
allocation of such costs to City Departments that will benefit from the 
implementation of IBM/Tivoh in future years is a policy issue that will 
be addressed by COIT during the current Fiscal Year. 

5. Mr. Harrington states that, although full implementation of 
IBM/Tivoli will begin in the first year for the Departments that are 
participating in the FY 1998-99 funding of the project (i.e., the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Memo to the Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

Airport; the Public Utilities Commission; the Municipal Railway; the 
Department of Public Works; the Emergency Communications 
Department; and DTIS) all City Departments and the Controller's 
Office will benefit in the first year because of the extension of 
IBM/Tivoli network management capabilities to the City's mainframe- 
based financial management system. 

6. The Mayor's Budget also included a reserve for the subject 
requested release of $1,000,000, subject to release of the funds at the 
discretion of the Mayor's Office. Mr. Matthew Hymel, Mayor's 
Director of Finance, informs the Budget Analyst that the Mayor's 
Office will release the reserved funds if approval is granted by the 
Finance Committee for this requested release of $1,000,000. 

7. Although, according to Ms. Friedlander, the proposed IBM/Tivoli 
project addresses a critical need of all of the City's computing systems, 
and will benefit the City's Financial Systems, and therefore all City 
Departments, the question of how future costs will be funded and 
allocated to City Departments remains unresolved. As stated above, 
this policy issue is to be addressed by the COIT, according to Mr. 
Harrington. Consequently, the Budget Analyst believes that approval 
of this request is a policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed release of reserved funds is a policy matter 
for the Board of Supervisors. 




Harvey M. Rose 



Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 



Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment I, Page 1 of 2 



DTIS Description of IBMrTivoli Benefits 
In the past, the CCSF information architecture was based on a Mainframe 
(located at the Data Center) with "dumb" terminals connected to it. This 
capability served the City and County well for many years when computing power 
was expensive and sharing this computing power made economic sense. As 
advances in technology made computing power cheaper, various departments 
began to deploy distributed computing architectures - Local Area Networks (LAN) 
that were based on a Client/Server environment to improve their operations and 
productivity through the use of office productivity tools such as Word and Excel. 
The introduction of E-Mail for internal communications and the need to access 
the Mainframe for the Financial Support systems resulted in the deployment of a 
Wide Area Network (WAN) so that the various departments could be connected 
and share information. Currently, the City has become more reliant on this 
technology to improve efficiency, perform many of the functions of government, 
and communicate internally and with the public. There is a growing demand and 
reliance for this technology in the day-to-day conduct of government business. 
The deployment of this type of technology in the E91 1 project demands that the 
City develop a means of managing these increasingly complex networks. 
Periodically, these networks have problems and fail. The result of these failures 
in the best case is loss of productivity due to staff being unable to complete tasks 
assigned to them. In the worse case, the loss of functionality of a complex 
network such as E91 1 could result in the loss of life. Unfortunately, the City has 
no tool to manage the growing number and increasingly complex networks. 



Source: Department of Telecommunications and Information Services 
8 



Attachment I, Page 2 of 2 

The advantages and benefits of the IBM/Tivoli project are as follows: 

a) Tivoli enables the City to begin to manage the diverse networks that exist in 
the City. 

b) As all these networks are connected, problems in one network have the 
potential of disrupting operations in other networks. Tivoli enables the City 
staff to diagnose and cure system problems, in some cases, before users 
would know that there is a problem. 

c) It enables the City to insure that all software installed in the city is maintained 
to a single standard and that all employees would be using the same versions 
of software. This improves the flow of information by eliminating the need to 
request that documents be reformatted to meet the specific version software 
of individual users. 

d) Tivoli enables the City to rapidly and efficiently deploy software with minimal 
disruption to existing users. All of these operations can be accomplished 
from one or more central location. 

Some specific examples of improved operations that will be realized by the 
implementation of IBM/Tivoli are described below: 

a) Avoidance of downtime by monitoring the network to detect and diagnosing 
potential problems and fixing them before they disrupt the network. 

b) Reduction of downtime by speeding up the diagnosing and isolation of 
problems that have disrupted the network. 

c) Minimizing the risk to the City arising from the installation of unlicensed 
software on City computers. 

d) As Tivoli is implemented, DTIS network engineers and technicians will 
increasingly be able to solve network and user problems in advance, from a 
central location. This will reduce the number of emergency calls that require 
traveling to remote locations. 



Source: Department of Telecommunications and Information Services 
9 




Attachment I 



Cm - AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISG^ 
Department of Telecommunications & Informa.tiou Services 
Committee on Information Technology 



June 19, 1998 



Mr. Edmundo Colchado . 

Deputy Director for Network Engineering 

Department of Telecommunications & Information Services 

875 Stevenson Street, 5th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94103 

Dear Ed: 



The purpose of this letter is to confirm a Sole Source approval for a Tivoli 
Enterprise License by the Committee on Information Technology (COIT). The 
Tivoli Enterprise License will be deployed as a network management utility for 
agencies of the City. 

Thank you for your cooperation during our first year of COIT. We look forward to 
"working with you in the future. 

With best regards, 




iamngtoriy 
Chair, Commattee on Information Technology 



cc: Jessica Josephson, Director. DTIS 

Robert Maerz, Deputy City Attorney 
Deborah Vincent- James, COIT 
Gary Staley, IBM 
Steve Goodison, Tivoli 



875 Stevenson Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103 
Phone (415) 554-4138 Fax (415) 554-4047 



10 



MINUTES 

FINANCE COMMITTEE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

REGULAR MEETING 



WEDNESDAY. SEPTEMBER 23. 1998 - 1:00 P.M. VETERANS BUILDING 

4 01 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

ABSENT: Supervisor Kaufman 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

Meeting Commenced: 1:15 p.m. 

CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All items listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are 

considered to be routine by the Committee and will be acted upon 
by a single, roll-call vote of the Committee. There will be no 
separate discussion of these items unless a member of the 
Committee or the public so requests, in which event the matter 
shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a 
separate item. 

a. File 98-1461 . [Prop J Contract, Janitorial Services] 
Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that janitorial services can be practically performed at 
the Permit Center at 1660 Mission Street and at 25 Van Ness 
by private contractor for lower cost than similar work 
services performed by City and County employees. (Real 
Estate Department) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 

b. File 98-1462 . [Prop J Contract, Security Services] 
Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that security services can be practically performed at the 
Permit Center at 1660 Mission Street and at 25 Van Ness by 
private contractor for lower cost than similar work 
services performed by City and County employees. (Real 
Estate Department) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 



File 98-1476 . [Prop J Contract, Paratransit Services] 
Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that paratransit services for the Public Transportation 
Commission can be practically performed by a private 
contractor at a lower cost than by City and County 
employees. (Public Transportation Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 



File 98-1481 . [Reserved Funds, PUC] Hearing to consider 
release of reserved funds, Public Utilities Commission 
(1988 Sewer Revenue Bond Proceeds, Ordinance No. 332-96), 
in the amount of $1,000,000 for construction of the Pier 98 
Wetlands Enhancement Project. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $4,471,460 approved. Filed. 



File 98-1539 . [Reserved Funds, DPT] Hearing to consider 
release of reserved funds, Dept. of Parking and Traffic (FY 
1998-1999 budget) in the amount of $4,471,460 to execute an 
agreement with PRWT Services Inc. for an Automated Parking 
Citation Processing and Collection System, including hand 
held ticket writing devices. (Dept. of Parking and Traffic) 

SPEAKERS: None. 



ACTION: 



Release of $4,471,460 approved. Filed. 



REGULAR CALENDAR 



File 98-1541 . [Tax Rate Pass Through] Resolution establishing 
tax rate pass through amount for residential tenants pursuant to 
Chapter 37 of the San Francisco Administrative Code (Residential 
Rent Stabilization) . (Controller) 
(Consideration continued from 9/16/98) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Ed Harrington, 

Controller; Marvis Phillips - opposed; Garrett Jenkins 
- opposed; Gary Near - opposed. 



ACTION: 



Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-1176 . [Settlement of Grievance, Fariba Mahmoudi] 
Ordinance authorizing settlement of the pay grievance of Fariba 
Mahmoudi filed pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding 
between the International Federation of Professional and 
Technical Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, and the City & County of 
San Francisco in the amount of Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred 
Twenty-Six Dollars and Fifty-Cents ($16,826.50). (Department of 
Human Resources) 
(Consideration continued from 9/16/98) 



SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Paula Schiff, Employee 

Relations Division, Dept. of Human Resources - support 
for amended ERD version. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amendment of the Whole (with new title) 
adopted (see new title below) . Recommended as amended. 

Title: [Settlement of Grievance, Fariba Mahmoudi*] 
Ordinance authorizing settlement of the pay grievance 
of Fariba Mahmoudi filed pursuant to the Memorandum of 
Understanding between the International Federation of 
Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21, 
AFL-CIO, and the City and County of San Francisco in 
the amount of Fifteen Thousand Seven Hundred 
Forty-Eight Dollars and Sixty-Six Cents ($15,748.66). 
(Department of Human Resources) 

File 98-0140 . [Appropriation, Dept. of Public Health] Ordinance 
appropriating $1,500,000, Dept. of Public Health - Community 
Health Services, Community Health Service Tobacco Settlement 
Revenue, to fund for health education, promotion and enforcement 
programs to discourage smoking among minors, and for the 
creation of 2 . 1 new positions for FY 1998-1999; see File 
98-0141. (Department of Public Health) 
(Consideration continued from 5/13/98) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose; Budget Analyst; Bob Prentice, Dept. of 
Public Health - support; Alyonik Hrushow, Dept. of 
Public Health - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on page 1, line 4 after 

"1998-99" to add "; placing $553,405 on reserve."; 
amended by adding page 3 to read as follows: "Section 
3. The Board of Supervisors hereby places of total of 
$553,405 on reserve ($453,405 from professional 
services pending the results of Phase 1 of the project 
and $100,000 from Services of Other Department - 
County Agri/Weights & Measures pending submission of 
annual salary ordinance for new positions) to be 
released by the Finance Committee." (see new title). 
Recommended as amended . 

Title: [Appropriation, Department of Public Health] 
Ordinance appropriating $1,500,000, Department of 
Public Health - Community Health Services, Community 
Health Service Tobacco Settlement Revenue, to fund for 
health education, promotion and enforcement programs 
to discourage smoking among minors, and for the 
creation of 2.1 new positions for fiscal year 
1998-1999; placing $553,405 on reserve; companion 
measure to File 98-0141. (Department of Public Health) 



NOTE: Supervisors Tenq and Newsom added as 
sponsors. 



File 98-0141 . [Annual Salary Ordinance, Dept. of Public Health] 
Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 243-98 (Annual Salary 
Ordinance, 1998-1999) , Department of Public Health - Community 
Health Service, reflecting the creation of 2.1 new positions 
(Class 2822 Health Educator and Class 1426 Senior Clerk Typist) ; 
companion measure to File 98-0140. (Department of Public Health) 
(Consideration continued from 5/13/98) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose; Budget Analyst; Bob Prentice, Dept. of 
Public Health - support; Alyonik Hrushow, Dept. of 
Public Health - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on lines 12 and 13 to replace 
"N" class with "L" class (represents limited tenure) . 
Recommended as amended. 

NOTE: Supervisors Teng and Newsom added as 
sponsors. 



File 98-1482 . [Appropriation, Sheriff Department] Ordinance 
appropriating $240,272, Sheriff Department, of Public Protection 
Revenue Special Fund for the purchase of computer hardware 
software and a fax machine, for fiscal year 1998-1999. RO 
#98022. (Controller) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Sheriff Michael Hennessey 
- support. 



ACTION: 



Hearing held. Recommended, 



File 98-1483 . [Appropriation, Department of Public Works] 
Ordinance appropriating $2,887,609, Department of Public Works, 
of Realty Trust Funds to reimburse the San Francisco County 
Transportation Authority for funds used to purchase the Rincon 
Park portion of the Marine Terminals Corporation parcel, and for 
the construction of the Mid-Embarcadero surface roadway, and for 
street improvement projects, for fiscal year 1998-1999. RO 
#98023. (Controller) 



SPEAKERS 



ACTION: 



Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Tina Wilson, Dept, 
Public Works - support. 

Hearing held. Recommended. 



of 



8. File 98-1423 . [Airport Lease Agreement, Federal Aviation 

Administration] Resolution approving lease agreement for Low 
Level Windshear Alert System between the United States of 
America and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through its Airport Commission. (Airport Commission) 

SPEAKER: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 



ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on lines 6 and 21 after 

"Commission" to add "; effective retroactive to July 
1, 1998." (see new title). Recommended as amended. 



Title; [Airport Lease Agreement, Federal Aviation 
Administration] Resolution approving lease agreement 
for Low Level Windshear Alert System between the 
United States of America and the City and County of 
San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport 
Commission; effective retroactive to July 1, 1998*., 
(Airport Commission) 

9. File 98-1456 . [Airport Concession Lease] Resolution approving 
the "North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease" between Host 
International, Inc. and the City and County of San Francisco, 
acting by and through its Airport Commission. (Airport 
Commission) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Peter Nardoza, S.F. 
Airport - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to 10/7/98. 

10. File 98-1472 . [Real Estate Purchase Renovation] Resolution 
authorizing the Police Department to enter into a purchase 
agreement for the property located at 301 Eddy Street. 
(Supervisors Teng, Newsom) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Anthony DeLucchi, Dept. 
of Real Estate - support; Gwendolyn Westbrook - 
support; Algeron Dedmon, IV - support; Marvis Phillips 
- support; Garrett Jenkins - support; Jim Thompson - 
support; Jeff Quiros, Church of Scientology - support; 
St. Anthony Foundation Representative - support; 
Joseph Colteras - neither. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

NOTE : Supervisors Teng and Newsom added as 
sponsors. 

11. File 98-1419 . [Lease of Property, S.F. General Hospital] 
Resolution authorizing the expansion and extension of an 
existing lease of real property at S.F. General Hospital with 
the University of California Regents. (Real Estate Department) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Anthony DeLucchi - Dept. 
of Real Estate - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

VOTE ON ALL ITEMS WAS 3-0 . 
Meeting Adjourned: 2 : 20 p.m. 



Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn, Dept. 41 



o.a?r 



&/<?!! 



y.ctt 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

/, 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



September 18, 1998 
TO: ^Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst Re^^^^uu^ ■&' *.€.+.*., * ■ 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 



SUBJECT: September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting $£p g g 1998 
Item la - File 98-146 1 



SAN FRANClboO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Department: 
Item: 



Service to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Real Estate Department 



Resolution concurring with the Controller's 
certification that janitorial services can continue to 
be. practically performed, at the Permit Center at 
1660 Mission Street and at the 25 Van Ness Avenue 
facility occupied by City Departments by private 
contractor for a lower cost than similar services 
performed by City and County employees. 



Janitorial Services 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which have 
been performed by City employees if the Controller 
certifies, and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that 
such services can in fact be performed by private 
firms at a lower cost than similar work services 
performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for 
the janitorial services at the Permit Center at 1660 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Mission Street and at 25 Van Ness Avenue for FY 
1998-99 would result in combined estimated savings 
as follows: 





Citv Operating Service Costs 


Lowest 

Salary 

Step 


Highest 

Salary 

Step 




Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 


$327,761 
95.491 


$386,980 
104.124 




Total 


$423,252 


$491,104 




Contractual Service Cost 


219.420 


219.420 




Estimated Savings 


$203,832 


$271,684 


Comments: 


1. The 25 Van Ness buildim 


I was acqui 


red bv the 



City in 1991. The Permit Center at 1660 Mission 
Street was acquired by the City in 1994. Since the 
acquisition of these buildings, janitorial services 
have been continuously provided by outside 
contractor services. 

2. Mr. Allan Lucas of the Real Estate Department 
reports that Ward's Building Maintenance is the 
current janitorial services contractor for both the 
1660 Mission Street and the 25 Van Ness Avenue 
facilities. The existing 1660 Mission Street 
janitorial services contract is for two years, which 
extends from November 1, 1996 through October 31, 
1998. According to Mr. Lucas, the Purchasing 
Department is currently preparing the necessary 
documents to rebid this contract, effective November 
1, 1998. 

Mr. Lucas reports that the existing 25 Van Ness 
Avenue janitorial services contract is for the two 
year period extending from October 1, 1996 through 
September 30, 1998. According to Mr. Lucas, the 
Purchasing Department is currently accepting bids 
for janitorial contractor services at the 25 Van Ness 
Avenue building, effective October 1, 1998. Mr. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Lucas reports that the Department will not approve 
a new contract for janitorial services, until the 
proposed Proposition J resolution is approved... Mr. 
Lucas also reports that the current janitorial 
services contract contains month-to-month holdover 
provisions. The Real Estate Department may extend 
this janitorial services contract for an additional 
one month through October 31, 1998, to allow the 25 
Van Ness Avenue building and the 1660 Mission 
Street building to have concurrent dates for their 
janitorial contracts. According to Mr. Lucas, even if 
both the 25 Van Ness Avenue and the 1660 Mission 
Street buildings janitorial services contracts have 
the same contract time period, they will continue to 
be separately bid. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the 
purpose of this analysis was developed from an 
estimate prepared by the current contractor, based 
on the work scope. 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaires 
with the Real Estate Department's responses for 
both the 25 Van Ness Avenue and the 1660 Mission 
Street buildings are shown in the Attachment to 
this report. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



V 



Attachment 
Page 1 or 2 



CHARTER 8300-1 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 



Department: Real Estate 

Contract Services: Janitorial Service - 25 Van Ness Avenue 

Contract Period: 10/1/98 to 9/30/2000 

(1) Who performed activity/ service prior to contracting out? Ward's Building Maintenance, 
Inc. has provided janitorial service beginning Jury 1, 1992 

(2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting out 9 None. 

(3) Explain disposition of employees if they were not laid off Not applicable. 

(4) What percentage of City employee's time is spent on services to be contracted out 9 
None. 

(5) How long have the services been contracted out Is this likely to be a one-time or an 
ongoing request for contracting out? Beginning July 1, 1992 - Ongoing. 

(6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification 9 Has it been certified for 
each subsequent year 9 1992-93 - Yes. 

(7) How will contract services meet the goals of your MBEAVBE Action Plan Proposed 
contract for FY 98-2000 will be bidded with H.RC approval 

(8) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance for its 
employees 9 Even if it is not required, does the proposed contractor provide health 
insurance for its employees No. They do not. 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses 9 If so, are the 
same benefits provided to employees with domestic partners If not, how does the 
proposed contractor comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance No. Contractor does 
not provide benefits to employees or spouses. 



Department Representative: .Allan B Lucas 

Real Property Officer 

Telephone: (415)554-9866 



Attachment 
Page 2 of 2 

CHARTER 8300-1 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

Department: Real Estate 

Contract Services: Janitorial Service - 1660 Mission Street 

Contract Period: 1 1/1/98 to 10/3 1/2000 

(1) Who performed activity/service prior to contracting out? Ward's Building Maintenance, 
Inc. has provided janitorial service beginning April 1, 1994, the date of initial building 
occupancy. 

(2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting out? None. 

(3) Explain disposition of employees if they were not laid off? Not applicable. 

(4) What percentage of City employee's time is spent on services to be contracted 
out? . None. 

(5) How long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time or 
an ongoing request for contracting out? Beginning April 1, 1994 - Ongoing. 

(6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification? Has it been certified for 
each subsequent year? 1993-94 - Yes. 

(7) How will contract services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE Action Plan? Proposed 
contract for FY 98-2000 will be bidded with H.R.C. approval. 

(8) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance for its 
employees? Even if it is not required, does the proposed contractor provide health 
insurance for its employees? No. They do not. 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so, are the 
same benefits provided to employees with domestic partners 9 If not, how does the 
proposed contractor comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? No. Contractor does 
not provide benefits to employees or spouses. 



Department Representative: Allan B. Lucas 

Real Property Officer 

Telephone: (415)554-9866 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item lb - File 98-1462 



Department: 
Item: 



Service to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Real Estate Department 

Resolution concurring witb tbe Controller's 
certification that security services can continue to be 
practically performed, at the Permit Center at 1660 
Mission Street and at the 25 Van Ness Avenue 
facility occupied by various City Departments, by a 
private contractor for a lower cost than similar 
services performed by City and County employees. 



Security Services 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which have 
been performed by City emploj^ees if the Controller 
certifies, and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that 
such services can in fact be performed by private 
firms at a lower cost than similar work services 
performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for 
the security services at the Permit Center at 1660 
Mission Street and at 25 Van Ness Avenue for FY 
1998-99 would result in combined estimated savings 
as follows: 



Lowest 
Salary 
Citv Operating Service Costs Step 



Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 



$291,706 
89.824 



Total $381,530 

Contractual Service Cost 186.147 

Estimated Savings $195,383 



Highest 

Salary 

Step 

$344,256 
98.084 

$442,340 

186.147 

$256,193 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Comments: 1. The 25 Van Ness Avenue building was acquired 

by the City in 1991. The Permit Center at 1660 
Mission Street was acquired by the City in 1994. 
Since the acquisition of these buildings, security 
sendees have been continuously provided by outside 
contractor services. 

2. Mr. Allan Lucas of the Real Estate Department 
reports that McCoy Patrol Services provides the 
current security guard services at the 1660 Mission 
Street building. This two-year security services 
contract began on January 1, 1997 and extends 
through December 31, 1998. According to Mr. Lucas, 
the Purchasing Department is currently preparing 
the necessary documents to rebid this contract, 
effective on January 1, 1999. 

Mr. Lucas reports that Black Bear Security provides 
the current security guard services at the 25 Van 
Ness Avenue building. This two-year security 
services contract began on November 1, 1996 and 
extends through October 31, 1998. According to Mr. 
Lucas, the current security contract contains a 
month-to-month holdover provision. The Real Estate 
Department may extend this security services 
contract for an additional two months through 
December 31. 1998, to allow the 25 Van Ness 
Avenue building and the 1660 Mission Street 
building to have concurrent dates for their security 
contracts. Mr. Lucas reports that the Purchasing 
Department is also currently preparing the 
necessary documents to rebid this security contract. 
According to Mr. Lucas, even if both the 25 Van 
Ness and the 1660 Mission Street buildings security 
services contracts have the same contract time 
period, they will continue to be separately bid. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the 
purpose of this analysis, which includes the costs for 
both the 1660 Mission Street and the 25 Van Ness 
Avenue facilities, is based on the previous fiscal 
year costs for security services, adjusted by a five 
percent inflation factor. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaires 
with the Real Estate Department's responses for 
both the 25 Van Ness Avenue and the 1660 Mission 
Street buildings are shown in the Attachment to 
this report. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment 
Page 1 of 2 



CHARTER 8300-1 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 
Department: Real Estate 

Contract Services: Security Guard Service - 25 Van Ness Avenue 
Contract Period: 1 1//1/98 to 10/3 1/2000 



(1) Who performed activity/service prior to contracting out? McCoy Patrol Service 
has provided security service beginning July 1, 1992. Currently Black Bear 
Security Service is providing security service under the current contrant ending 
October 31, 1998. 

(2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting out? None. 

(3) Explain disposition of employees if they were not laid off? Not applicable. 

(4) What percentage of City employee's time is spent on services to be contracted 
out? None. 

(5) How long have the services been contracted out Is this likely to be a one-time 
or an ongoing request for contracting out? Beginning July 1, 1992 - Ongoing. 

(6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification 9 Has it been certified 
for each subsequent year 7 1992-93 - Yes. 

(7) How will contract services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE Action Plan 9 
Proposed contract for FY 98-2000 will be bided with H.R.C. approval. 

(8) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance 
for its employees? Even if it is not required, does the proposed contractor provide 
health insurance for its employees? No. Yes, they do. 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so, 
are the same benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not, how 
does the proposed contractor comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance 9 Yes, 
Contractor does provide benefits to employees or spouses The same benefits are 
provided to employees with domestic partners 

Department Representative: Allan B. Lucas 

Real Property Officer 

Telephone: (415)554-9866 

H:yO.\25VNSECdoc 



Page 2 of 2 



CHARTER 8.300-1 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

Department: Real Estate 

Contract Services: Security Guard Service - 1660 Mission Street 

Contract Period: 1/1/99 to 12/3 U2000 



(1) Who performed activity/service prior to contracting out? McCoy Patrol Service 
has provided security service beginning April 1, 1994, the date of initial building 
occupancy. 

(2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting out? None. 

(3) Explain disposition of employees if they were not laid off? Not applicable. 

(4) What percentage of City employee's time is spent on services to be contracted 
out? None. 

(5) How long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time 
or an ongoing request-for contracting out? Beginning April 1, 1994 - Ongoing. 

(6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification? Has it been 
certified for each subsequent year? 1993-94 - Yes. 

(7) How will contract services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE Action Plan? 
Proposed contract for FY 98-2000 will be bided with H.R.C. approval. 

(8) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance 
for its employees? Even if it is not required, does the proposed contractor provide 
health insurance for its employees? No. They do not. 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so, 
are the same benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not, how 
does the proposed contractor comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? No. 
Contractor does not provide benefits to employees or spouses. 

Department Representative: Allan B. Lucas 

Real Property Officer 

Telephone: (415)554-9866 



H:\AL\1660SEC.doc 



10 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lc - File 98-1476 

Department: 

Item: 



Service to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Public Transportation Commission 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that paratransit services for the Public Transportation 
Commission can continue to be practically performed by a 
private contractor at a lower cost than by City and County 
employees. 

Paratransit Services. 

City Charter Section 10.104.15 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which have been 
performed by City employees, if the Controller certifies 
and the Board of Supervisors concur, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for the 
paratransit services for FY 1998-99 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 



Comments: 





Lowest 


Highest 




Salary 


Salary 


Citv Operating Service Costs Step 


Step 


Salaries 


$8,019,398 


$10,059,689 


Fringe Benefits 


2,641,207 


2,961,941 


Capital and Operating 






Expenses 


1.759.098 


1.759.098 


Total 


$12,419,703 


$14,780,728 


Contractual Service Cost 


11.861.066 


11.863.590 


Estimated Savings 


$558,637 


$2,917,138 



1. Paratransit Services, which are door-to-door van and 
taxi transportation services for persons with disabilities, 
were first certified as required by Charter Section 10.104 
in 1984, and have been provided by an outside contractor 
since then. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. Ms. Annette Williams of the Municipal Railway reports 
that the current Paratransit Services contract with 
Cerenio Management Group began in October 1, 1991, 
and extended through June 30, 1996. In April of 1996, the 
Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the 
original contract with Cerenio Management Group to 
provide a three year extension of the contract, effective 
through June 30, 1999. According to Ms. Williams, the 
Municipal Railway is in the process of preparing the 
necessary documents to rebid this contract to begin in 
July of 1999. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is based on the contractor's projected actual 
costs for FY 1998-99. 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Public Transportation Commission's responses is shown 
in the Attachment to this report. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Attachment 



CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

DEPARTMENT. Public Transportation Commission /Municipal Railway 

CONTRACT SERVICES: Paratrapsit 

CONTRACT PERIOD: 07/01/98 - 6/30/99 

.a ~ 

(1 ) Who performed the activity/sen/toe poor to contracting out? 

Service has always been contracted out. 

(2) How many City employees were lard off as a resutt of contracting out? 

None. 

(3) Explain the disposition of employees if they were not laid off. 

N/A 

(4) What percentage of City employees' time is spent of services to be contracted out? 

20% of one full-time equivalent contract administrator 
plus 3 hours per month of a 1630 Accountant. 

(5) How long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time or an ongoing 
request for contracting out? 

Eighteen (18) years. Likely to be an ongoing 
request for contracting out. 

(6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J cer ti fi ca tion? Has it been certified for each 
subsequent year? 

FY 83-84. Yes, it has been certified every year. 

fT) How will the services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE Action Plan? 

The Broker services are currently performed by an 
MBE/WBE firm and not less than 30% of all service 
is provided by MBE/WBE firms. 

(8) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health Insurance for its employees? 
Even if not required, are health benefits provided? 

Yes, the contract requires health insurance 
for employees . 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so. are the same 
benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not. how does the proposed contractor 
comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? 

Yes, the contractor provides benefits to employees with 
spouses and domestic partners. 
Department Representative. Annette Williams 

Telephone Number 923-6142 ^_____ 



13 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item Id - File 98-1 481 



Department: 



Item: 



Port 

Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Hearing to consider the release of reserved funds in the 
amount of $1,000,000 from 1988 Sewer Revenue Bond 
Funds to construct the Pier 98 Wetlands Enhancement 
Project. 



Amount & 
Source of Funds: 



$1,000,000 from previously reserved 1988 Sewer Revenue 
Bond Funds under the Clean Water Program of the Public 
Utilities Commission. 



Description: 



In August of 1996, the Board of Supervisors appropriated 
$1,000,000 of 1988 Sewer Revenue Bond Funds from the 
Clean Water Program for construction of the Pier 98 
Wetlands Enhancement Project. These funds were 
reserved pending the Port's submission to the Finance 
Committee of the contractors selected and submission of 
contract cost details. This request would authorize the 
release of $1,000,000 in PUC funds for the construction of 
the Pier 98 Wetlands Enhancement Project. 

According to Ms. Wendy Iwata of the PUC, as part of the 
PUC's request for an exception to the Basin Plan's 1 10:1 
dilution requirements from the Regional Water Quality 
Control Board, the PUC agreed to use Clean Water 
Program monies to partially fund the Port's Pier 98 
Wetlands Enhancement Project in the amount of 
$1,000,000. 



Ms. Carol Bach of the Port explains that the Pier 98 
Wetlands Enhancement Project is an ongoing wetlands 
environmental project initiated by the Port to mitigate 
landfill that the Port previously placed in Pier 98 in 
anticipation of using Pier 98 as a cargo facility. As a 
result of the Port losing most of its cargo business, the 
cargo facility at Pier 98 was never constructed. The Port 
then faced a legal dispute with the Bay Conservation 
Development Corporation (BCDC) regarding the status of 



1 The Basin Plan is the Regional Water Quality Control Board's plan for monitoring and controlling 
water quality in the San Francisco Bay. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

I 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

the landfill at Pier 98 and its future use. According to Ms. 
Bach, in order to avoid litigation, the Port and BCDC 
mutually agreed that the Port would convert the lan dfill 
at Pier 98 into wetlands and a recreation area through 
the Pier 98 Wetland Enhancement Project. The Pier 98 
Wetland Enhancement Project would include 26 acres of 
land, 14 of which would be devoted to wetlands, with the 
balance of the 12 acres devoted to recreation, uplands 
beautification and shoreline protection. 

Ms. Bach reports that construction work to be performed 
for the Project consists of debris removal, excavation and 
grading, shoreline protection and upland beautification, 
with the specific purpose of creating a recreation area 
that is also an environmental enhancement for the 
community. 

Budget: The total estimated project cost is $1,759,835, including 

$1,423,650 in contract costs, $142,365 for contract 
contingencies, $177,320 in trail construction and 
landscaping costs (see Comment No. 1) and $16,500 in 
Port costs. Attachment I, provided by Ms. Bach, contains 
the budget details for the total estimated project cost of 
$1,759,835. 

The construction contract for the Pier 98 Wetlands 
Enhancement Project was awarded by the Port to 
Bauman Landscape in the amount of $1,423,650. 
According to Ms. Bach, Bauman Landscape was the only 
responsive bidder. Ms. Bach points out that the lowest 
bidders did not meet the MBEAVBE goals established by 
the Human Rights Commission. Attachment II, provided 
by Ms. Bach, contains a list of the firms and their bids for 
the construction of the Pier 98 Wetlands Enhancement 
Project. 

This request for the release of $1,000,000 for the 
construction of the Pier 98 Wetlands Enhancement 
Project requires an additional $759,835 (total project costs 
of $1,759,835 less the requested release of $1,000,000 on 
reserve). According to Ms. Bach, the source of the 
additional $759,835 would be from (1) previously 
approved grant funds from the California State Coastal 
Conservancy in the amount of $500,000 (File No. 98- 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



0822); (2) the Association of Baj T Area Governments in the 
amount of $66,000 (File No. 98-0823); and, (3) the Port's 
FY 1997-98 appropriated capital funds in the amount of 
$193,835. 



Comment: 



Recommendation: 



1. According to Ms. Bach, as part of the Pier 98 Wetlands 
Enhancement Project, the Port plans to award a contract 
to the San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners, the 
California Conservation Corps, and the San Francisco 
Conservation Corps in the amount of $177,320 for the 
construction of trails and landscaping work at Pier 98. 
Ms. Bach reports that the Board of Supervisors previously 
waived this contract from the City's competitive bid 
process (File No. 98-0821). 

Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



16 



rurci Ur br -H u 5 



415 274 65BS P.B2 



ATTACHMENT I 
PIER 98 WETLANDS AND PUBLIC ACCESS ENHANCEMENT PROJECT 

Construction Budget 

Item Cost 

Wetlands and Public Access Improvements - Lump Sum Costs: $1 ,423,650 

Includes clearing, grading, installation of landfill cover, hydroseedmg, site furnishings, 
fishing pier. Includes costs for on-site reuse or off-site disposal of estimated quantities 
or rock, soil, and other material To be performed by Bauman Landscape, under 
contract to the Port 

Construction Contingency: 10% of Lump Sum and Unit Costs $142,365 

Trail Construction and Native Plant Landscaping: $177,320 

Includes final grading and installation of surface material on trails, propagation and 
planting of native plants. To be performed by the San Francisco League of Urban 
Gardeners, the Calif. Conservation Corps, and the San Francisco Conservation 
Corps under contract to the Port. 

Signs: S1 6,500 

Interpretive, directional and regulations signs. To be purchased directly from 
manufacturer by the Port. 

TOTAL $1,759,835 



17 



Z.ZJ 1 r— J.33B 



PORT OF SF EH a S 



415 274 058S P. 03 



C/> 



>- u. 

s *- 

2 OS 

V) 
O 

CO 









ii | — 


o 


a => 


a 


o 





o 


o o[ o 


o 


o 


o 


□ 


°l 


o 














£> 






o 


3 


a 


§ 


o 




o 


c> o 


C9 






















w 










o 


o_ 


IC 


p 


°- 


o 


^ 




O 


a 


°-li te - 














o" 










SO* 


o" 






e» 








o" 


ID 


















» 








CM 


*s» 












«rt 


M 




*V 




■H SS 




















** 


*» 




































h~ 








































Q 










































** 




o < 


as 














































c& 


cs 














































* 


o 




o 




O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 




O 


o 










< 






o 








o 




o 


o 


o 


5 




O 


CP 












m * 

e « 


o 


5 


■J 


. 


q 
o 




"^ 


o 




& 


t> 


10 


IO 


cp 
Q 


o_ 


s 


«rt 


*v 


*» 


vt 










| 


o 










** 




CM 


•V 




















ft 


O 


3 






** 


•rt 


*» 




w» 




































































m — 


K 
























































o 




o 


O 


D 


o 


o 





o 


o 


o 


o 


a 


a 


CS 


^ 


o 


g 












o 




e> 


o 




Q 


D 




o 




a 


Q 


o 


o 




o 


o 














o_ 




o 


Q 


q 


o_ 


CP 


o_ 


tp t 


o 


o 




ID 


o 


iD 


CM_ 


o 


















© 


o 


o 


o" 


in 


o" 


ci" 










e» 


h-" 




co" 


c. , 


















n 














•* 


fc« 






















o 
1- 






o 




«rt 


** 




tf* 


w» 


•» 








Vi- 




*^ 














"* 




*» 








•* 






















J 


> 
< 


o 






















































o 


e> 


o 


a 


Q 


o 


o 


o 




O 


© 




m 


o 






< 

U 














o 


§ 




o 


o 


o 


a 


o 


O 










*A 










o 




o_ 


q 


o 


c. 


5 


o 




o_ 




ert 


** 










m | 


o 


co 


5 


o 




© 



© 


d 


o" 




o' 




ert 


lf» 


"* 








V* 






£ « 














w 








o* 
























1 ° 








0^ 






































E 


io 


=> 










































5 












































C3 o 


< 


s. 


























































n 










CM 




CO 


a 




e> 


LO 


q 


a 


^*f 












CO 




CM 






en 










CO 






o 






o 


















CD 




















CM 


Q 




o> 














m 


to 




t4 


o" 


CD 


ri 


CO* 


^-" 


V>* 


rj" 


CO 


—* 


CM 


K-" 


r-" 


en 


o" 


u>| 




















♦V 


« 




*^ 




•* 












VJ- 














t- 


trt- 




u> 








fa* 














U7 








« 
















































a > 














































■ < 


o 














































o 








o 




a> 




CM 


w 




a 






CO 


CM 




O 






S 




























CO 








CP 


CM 


CM 






trS- 




CI 

< 


o 


CO 

;-i 


^ 


» 




3 


a 

g 


CQ 


n 


CO 


u 


>o 


n 


s 


10 


» 


** 


trt 


W 






CJ 














n 






























Li. o 
















4* 








*« 


trt 


M 


















LL 

co 


22. 
o 




EL 


V* 




**■ 








4* 


























D 












































e — 


CO 


























































© 




e> 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


c= 


o 


o 


o 




a 


foj 












<c 






o 


o 










o 


O 




o 


o 




o 


o 














h* 




o_ 


q 


G> 


q 


Ifl 




o 


© 






r- 


CJ 




5 


o_ 


















© 




li> 








EC 


o' 








H9 


cm' 


cp" 




Ct>*| 












m 






*» 














vs- 












** 












O 


CN 






** 












V* 












M 




CN) 












H 


w 




** 








** 














i/> 








M 




a 
















































s 1 














o 


o 




£9 


o 


a 


o 


O 




n 


O 




ID 
















CO 




o 




o 


o 






o 




e> 


CO 






irt 








S 55 


CD 


aj 


CO 


o 


ad 




©; 


q 


q_ 


id 


ID 


w 


^ 




o 


to 


V? 


M 




V*- 






c ■£ 














o 






**» 






4/ 




■A 
















LL o 


< 














«rt 


4* 






•* 
























io" 


B 


D_ 


w 




•ft 








V* 


























u 












































0. — 


w 


IS 
















































-a 




























































































re 


C 
































L. 


ti 










E 






























e 


C 


° 


=j 












9 

a 


to 






£ 


CO 


GQ 


2 


CO 


m 


ES 


s 




O 














UJ 


J 




J 




3 






2 




a 


■ 


5 


o 


■ 


a 








































B 






















■S 




























































































1 


s 












g 






i 


■ 


i 


c. 




o 












c 
























u 


L> 


u 


& 
















a 


















E 



























































-o 
















a 












V 








■ 
















































o 


a 


o 


















6 




c 


s 




5 


£ 






s 


s 


■ 


B> 


[* 




1 




V 












Q 


1 


"O 
c 


i 


e 


CI 


I 


^ 


a 


2 


a 




5 




5 

-5 


V 


e 


a 














i 


| 


3 


£J 


i 


-= 


6L 


S 


■ 


1 


i 


S 


o 


1 


a 


8 


rt 
















a. 






> 




o 














1 
















a 


E 


c 


o 


I 


V 


~c 


^5 


e 


s 


T 


■ 


B 


c 


| 


| 


O 












< 


c_ 




"? 




s 


ii 




c 


CD 


L^ 


i- 






D5 


s 


CL 


^ 






* 












































"D 


E 












































m 




T- 




cy 


M 


,_ 


(M 


ri 


^. 


CQ 




^ 


_ 


N 


ro 


.- 


LO 


a 












"~ 


m 




m 


a 


< 


4 


< 


< 


< 


s 


< 


p 


3 


3 


3 


3 


5 







ATTACHMENT II 
Paee 1 of 2 



18 



5-P-17-199B 17:25 



PORT OF SF EH t 



415 274 05B5 P. 04 



ATTACHMENT II 
Page 2 of 2 



< 
< P 



< o 



2 < » 











































! 




■S • < S 

C 3 C_> ^ 

J -i fl ' 

- O c o 

£ 2 ° " 
S o E ~ 

1^? 
o - c S. 


■ 


.- 


> 


> 


>- 


> 


> 


> 


> 


- 


>- 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


.- 


^ 


> 


>■ 


^ 




> 


o o 

< a £ 

5 1 < " 

m E <-> «o 
| O | | 

O S « 2. 


.7 

B 
Z 












































z 


s 

1 
- 


> 


• 


► 


► 


> 


V 


-- 




> 


> 


■- 


■' 


^ 


► 


- 


► 


► 


.- 


> 


>■ 


■ 

£ < £ 

5 S S « 
S £ ■ ° 

- J? rf* as 

" 5 -■ a. 

r _ , « o 


- 
Z 












































- 


E 

>■ 


- 


»- 


V 


>■ 


> 




- 


>. 


> 


>- 


> 


V 


> 


V 


- 


► 


>■ 


>-■ 


.- 


>- 


9 

ii o »~ 2 

■E <0 " *? 
a _ a rg 
e £ in 

ui 5 < <n 

jc .n O — 

is 8 - " 

© c> U. ~ 

a .- (/) 3, 














































7T 


v 


> 


- 


>■ 


>■ 


>■ 


- 


► 


>■ 


> 


> 


> 


V 


>■ 


- 


:- 


> 


> 


- 


'- 


^> 




■ 
[ 

D 


7 




o 
B 


- 


a 


- 

D 


o 

a 
B 


c 
















o 



B 


a 
e 


li 
a 
p 
B 


- 


c 

E 


J. 

- 
a 
c 
HI 

I 

-- 

2 

■ 
-- 

J 




■ 
| 

c 
U. 

£ 

9 

s 


- 


1 
| 

i 
< 

c 

— 
< 


Ob 

EC 


I 

EL 

B 

a 

o 

■a 

.r 




c 



1 



c 
■ 

e 

£ 

1 
u. 


jj 

- 
s 

en 


c 

c 
U 

c 

o 
C 

e 


E 

Q 
IL 
U 

DC 


| 

5 
u. 
C 
X 


■ 

o 
w 
O 

5- 


5 


a 


— 

IL 

o 
K 


■ 

? 
a 


i 

B 
- 


e 

a 

a 
Q 
-i 
- 
K 

1 


? 

1 
> 

"5 

c 

e 
B 

— 
5 


i 

e 

E 

_ 
I 





1 
s * 
a" 1 ' 

a 

c 




I 

I 

o o 

si 

o 


' 


• 

«• s 

o 
E 




K 

BOO 

a 2 m 

? » - "^ ^ rr ^ ^r 

o *X +i 
E N S 


* 


lolalHId ► 
PREFERENCES (aa applicable): 

MDF 10% 
WOE 10% 
LBE 6% 
JV 5% 
JV 7SS 
JV 10% 


i 

i. 
r 
c 



TOTHL P. 04 



19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item le - File 98-1539 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Department of Parking of Traffic (DPT) 

Request to release reserved funding for a contract 
between the City and PRWT Services, Inc. to provide an 
Automated Parking Citation Processing and Collection 
System. 

$4,471,460 

General Fund monies previously appropriated but 
reserved in DPTs FY 1998-99 operating budget. 

In July of 1998, the Board of Supervisors approved 
Resolution No 593-98 which authorized the Executive 
Director of the Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) 
to execute an agreement between the City and PRWT 
Services, Inc. for an Automated Parking Citation 
Processing and Collection System, which included hand 
held ticket writing devices. 

As part of the FY 1998-99 budget process, the Board of 
Supervisors approved funding for the system in the 
amount of $4,671,460, of which $4,471,460 was placed on 
reserve, pending final negotiation of a contract with 
PRWT and complete fiscal analysis of the contract. The 
DPT has completed the contract negotiation and the 
Board of Supervisors received the Budget Analyst's report 
on the fiscal impact of the contract prior to the Board of 
Supervisors' approval of the contract in July of 1998. 



Budget: 



According to DPT, 
allocated as follows: 



the reserved funding would be 



Comment: 



$3,130,000 
1,028,460 

313.000 
$4,471,460 



Citation processing costs 

Vendor payments on collection of 

delinquent accounts 

Payment of postage pass through costs 



1. Of the $4,671,460 that was approved in DPTs FY 
1998-99 budget for the Automated Parking Citation 
Processing and Collection System, the subject $4,471,460 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



20 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

was reserved. The remaining $200,000 was approved for 
DPT's routine expenditure for postage to mail notices of 
parking citations to recipients prior to DPT issuing the 
Notice to Proceed to PRWT. 

2. According to Mr. Steve Bell of DPT, the reserved 
amount of $4,471,460 is the estimated funding 
requirements for six months of the PRWT contract, which 
is projected to commence in October of 1998. 

Recommendation: Approve the requested release of reserved funds. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 2 - File 98-1541 

Department: Controller 

Item: Resolution establishing tax rate pass through amount for 

residential tenants pursuant to Chapter 37 of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code. 

Description: In May, 1996, the Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance 

amending Chapter 37 of the San Francisco Administrative 
Code, Sections 37.2, 37.3 and 37.8, to permit landlords to 
passthrough to residential tenants an amount based on any 
increase in Property Taxes imposed as a result of the 
repayment of General Obligation Bonds approved by the voters 
between November of 1996 and November of 1998. 

This proposed resolution would establish a tax rate of SO. 010 
(or one cent per hundred dollars of assessed valuation) 
attributable to General Obligation Bonds approved between 
November 1, 1996 and November 30, 1998 and repayable 
during FY 1998-99. The SO. 010 tax rate is part of the 
recommended tax rate of SI. 165 for Fiscal Year 1998-99 which 
is pending final passage by the Board of Supervisors (Files 98- 
1404, 98-.1405 and 98-1406). 

The attachment to this report, prepared by the Controller 
illustrates the impact of the pass through tax rate on several 
examples of rental properties within the City. These 
calculations are based on: a) authorized General Obligation 
bonded indebtedness of $288,000,000 as approved by the voters 
between November of 1996 and the present; b) $153,480,000 in 
debt either issued to date or to be issued during FY 1998-99; 
and, c) an annual debt service requirement of $6,057,947 
during FY 1998-99. The attachment contains examples 
showing that rent of tenants would increase by a range of 
$1.97 per unit per year or $0.16 per unit per month (for a six 
unit property located at 814 14 th Street) to $27.90 per unit per 
year or $2.33 per unit per month (for a three unit property 
located at 1723 Noe Street). As noted in the Controller's 
attachment, these examples are for illustration purposes only 
and the impact may vary if different assumptions are used. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



_ [n - - ir - 




' 01 












.- *" 


m 


< 


CO 


CO 


i - 


to 








0) 


ED 






• B 


-^ 


-JT 


u 


a 


■ CO 


m 




- 


Jz 



f 3 






















B 








— 




_> 


U 


8-° 






»: 


tc 








3 



3 


a Z 




Q 


C 




.• (O 






U 




N 


N 


00 


00 












rr> 


a 








a 


a 


at 


n 



5 uj 5 



fcomoi/ 1 ) — cnjcvjco 
[ rs, . cj — ; CO -c ^ <c — 



Attachment 



O ^ "^ C\J CD © CO 
C7> Ol -— O O »-- •— 

- wRo> n •- t n ui i\i 



5 iS =>i 



CM «- — 



,VtV>VtV>*fi<f*Ur<f> 



1 m o — o 



co o o o o r- 



*? * g £ S =1 
S uj a. 5 « 








C v 






5. c 


a 




o> -e 

























° 


Q 


»> 




O 


9 
* 


2 - 




"S «> 



Pin 

~?CM 


1(9 
hi 


ic 
r> 


CM 
CM 


CO 

cs 


— 
00 


KJ 

01 
T 


O 

a 

h. 


5rO 


- 


— 


CO 


■ 


CO 


t» 


I>» 






;ooTOcnoor-~ 
imomoooom 



n 




08^ 







:•: 









3f 3 


n 


CO 


r> 


O 













.- 


u> 




(n 


§i« 


— 


<— r-» 


in 


O 



o 2 ^1 

= 2 <n a 

o o i x 

; J 5 ? 



5 5 5 J 

5 tj "S o 

~ <n w ~ 

CO 1ft o o 

5 8 8 I 

— o> en "S 

> O) 01 CJ 

S — — v, 



o 2 2 £ 

2 C C o 



S&e 



3 -3 


r7 





_C 


CO 


s 

— 


> 
< 


















§ 


_) 


m 


01 


O 


s 





— 



23 



l *TCMVlfi'COO'- 
VrO^*-COtO-— -— — CO 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 3 - File 98-1176 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of 
September 16, 1998. An Amendment of the Whole will be submitted to the 
Finance Committee at its September 23, 1998 meeting. This report is based 
on the Amendment of the Whole. 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Department of Human Resources (DHR) 
Department of Transportation 

Ordinance authorizing the settlement of a pay grievance 
of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi filed against the City pursuant 
to the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, in the amount of 
$15,748.66. 

The proposed ordinance would approve a settlement 
against the City in the amount of $15,748.66 for a 
grievance filed on behalf of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi by the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21. 

According to Mr. Geoffrej' Rothman, of DHR, Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired by the Department of 
Transportation as a 5202 Junior Civil Engineer at Step 1 
on April 22, 1994 and worked at Step 1 for the period 
April 22, 1994 through November 17, 1995. According to 
Mr. Rothman, as stated in his attached memorandum of 
July 22, 1998, "At the time of her [Ms. Mahmoudi' s] offer 
of employment she was informed that she could be 
appointed above the entrance rate of Step 1 if she 
provided records documenting that she would experience 
a loss of compensation if she was appointed at Step 1. Ms. 
Mahmoudi submitted the required documentation to the 
Department of Transportation to justify an appointment 
to Step 5. No action was initiated by the department to 
request approval of the Step 5 appointment." 

The annual salary at Step 5 of a 5202 Junior Civil 
Engineer position as of April 22, 1994 when Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired was $44,970 or $7,882 higher than 
the annual salary of $37,088 at Step 1. On November 18, 
1995, Ms. Mahmoudi was promoted to classification 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer at Step 3 and worked at Step 3 
for the period November 18, 1995 through February 21, 
1997. If her promotion to the 5204 Assistant Civil 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



24 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Engineer position had been based on Step 5 of a 5202 
Junior Civil Engineer position, Ms. Mahmoudi would 
have been promoted to Step 5 of the 5204 Assistant Civil 
Engineer position instead of to Step 3 of the 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer position. As of November 18, 
1995, the date of her promotion, the annual salary at Step 
5 of a 5204 Assistant Civil Engineer position was Sol, 026 
or $4,751 higher than the $46,275 annual salary at the 
Step 3 salary which Ms. Mahmoudi received. 

Article III.3.G-Appointment Above Entrance Rate of the 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21 states that, "Appointments may be 
made by an appointing officer at any Step in the 
compensation schedule upon the approval of the Human 
Resources Director under one or more of the following 
conditions: a) A former permanent City employee, 
following resignation with service satisfactory, is being 
reappointed to a permanent position in his/her former 
classification, b) loss of compensation would result if 
appointee accepts position at the normal Step, c) a severe, 
easily demonstrated and documented recruiting and 
retention problem exists, d) the appointee possessed 
special experience, qualifications, and/or skills including, 
but not Limited to, the number of years performing similar 
work elsewhere which, in the Appointing Officer's opinion, 
warrants appointment above the entrance rate, e) to be 
considered, requests for adjustments under the provisions 
of this Section must be received in the offices of the 
Department of Human Resources not later than the end of 
the fiscal year in which the appointment is made, and f) 
when the Human Resources Director approves 
appointments of all new hires in a classification at a Step 
above the entrance rate, the Human Resource Director 
may advance to that Step incumbents in the same 
classification who are below that Step." 

On behalf of Ms. Mahmoudi, Local 21, AFL-CIO filed a 
grievance against the City in July. 1996 asserting 
violation of Article III.3.G-Appointment Above Entrance 
Rate of the MOU. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

25 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

In his July 22, 1998 memorandum, Mr. Rothman stated, 
"Ms. Mahmoudi inquired regarding the status of the 
request (to be appointed at a higher Step when she was 
first hired by the Department of Transportation) shortly 
after she was hired and was provided with inaccurate 
information bj r a former supervisor that resulted in her 
belief that an adjustment to her salary Step was no longer 
possible. However, Ms. Mahmoudi raised the issue again 
a year later when she became aware that two new hires in 
the 5202 class were advised that they could be eligible for 
an appointment above the entrance rate. As a 
consequence, Ms. Mahmoudi inquired as to the 
misinformation given to her and again requested her 
appointment retroactively to the higher Step. The 
Department then submitted a request to the Department 
of Human Resources, now two years later, for the Step 5 
appointment." 

However, Mr. Rothman stated in his memorandum, 
"Requests for appointment above the entrance rate in 
order to be considered must be received either prior to 
appointment or at least within the same fiscal year of 
appointment. Therefore, the request was untimely and 
was denied by the Department of Human Resources." 

However, at this time the Department of Human 
Resources is recommending approval of this subject 
settlement to grant Ms. Mahmoudi a settlement of 
$15,748.66 because, as Mr. Rothman states in his 
memorandum, "In view of the facts and circumstances 
provided by Ms. Mahmoudi and by the union, the 
Department of Human Resources is recommending 
approval of this settlement." 

Comments: 1. The original settlement amount was $16,826.50. 

Based on the terms of the original agreement, the Budget 
Analyst discovered that errors had been made in 
calculating the settlement amount and recommended that 
the amount be reduced to $13,936.79. Upon further 
review of the document, DHR and the union discovered 
that some of the terms of the original agreement were 
also in error and subsequently renegotiated the terms of 
the settlement agreement. Based on the revised terms of 
the agreement, the proposed settlement is now 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

$15,748.66, or $1,077.84 less than the original settlement 
amount of $16,826.50. The Budget Analyst has reviewed 
the calculations and concurs with the revised amount. 
The Department of Human Resources, the Department of 
Transportation and the union are also in agreement. 

2. Ms. Vicki Clayton of the City Attorney's Office advises 
that if the Board of Supervisors does not approve the 
proposed ordinance, the dispute would be decided by an 
arbitrator. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



ty and County of San Francisct 




tacninent 



Department of Human Resourc 



es 



My 22, 1993 



io: KarveyRosc 

Board of Supervisors' 3udger. Anahrsi 



KUKA.S R3SOURCHS DIRE-— DR 



Memo to Finance Committer 
August 5, 1998 



.-rorrr Geonrcy Rothsaa 

Employee Reiadocs Director 

?-: Fariba Mahmoudi Serdement 
File No. 9S-1176 

■ s- rarma Mahmouci was hired as a class 5202 Jr. Civil E^sine^- on March 29 

At me aaac of her offer of emcioymmt she was informed tha: she could be »-««; 

cui __ ra^e o: sueo 1 u snc Drcvicec records aocumentino trur *•-,» ,., • • 

. ic_s oi compensation u sac was appointed ai sten 1 Ms Vfannm^- 

suonoinec th» - 00 ,,:__^ j^„ „" ' ._- - - • - •— -i.juci 

_ c quixuj documencauon to me Department oi i ransoc-^tion m : i-<r---^ 

-' ° ^P -■ ^o acmen was inmated oy [he dcoanmeai to rtcuer ;=-^-~, ', - 
me steo 5 aoco^'-^-t " '~. u «. approval ot 



i oo^ 



Ms. M=n 



2ouci incuircc 



starts of chs 



.__jcst saortiy af-.er she was n; re o 
ZyJ^t ? ; 0V ~ iQ : c '^- >E2=-Jratt Infonaarion by a former supervisor thai resulted"^.- 
----- ^--. an amusm lent to her salary siz-p was no longer possible. 

. ^-z^ouci raiseu the issue again a year later when she became a"ar- -K 

l~0 new PJras jaa, fcc 52Q2 cl ^ s were 2dvis ^ d jjj., ^ COLi , d . M e!icn -."j - . - " 

appointment above the entrance rate. ' 

. "'——.-- «<x, Ms. Mamzoucu maiarec as to tne rrusiuiorrriaticn = : v~-, - v, 
*g2an requested her appoLicscni resoacriveiv to the hishcr sum. " *' "' ' " ^' C 



~T D ^ anmcn V thc:5 su 'CEincd a request to the Department a:- 
l "° ^' £3rs later, for the sieo 5 aoDoinrment. 



resources, now 



^ZS**? f ° r *?!»««=*=» above the entrance rase b order to be considered must be 

-e-.vec eimer prior to aDcoisimeoE or at leas: within the same -"seal ve*<- n" 
aDDCintme=T Tr.,—»-« ' '■ ■ " — 

ir,',,,,.. ^ — -in-e.ore, tne request was untimely anc was oemcc by rhe Dcoarum^- 

~.'.. L ~' LoC2i 21 r --^ Sled a grievance on behalf of Ms. Mahmo 



or ~t 



Resourc: 



ici with the Denary 



Ln view of the T " 



IS and circumstances provided by Ms. Mahmouci and bv the unio- -'->• 
* C: rrurnan Resource is recommending approval of this scniessen- 



J-i Goutii Sl-»«[ • Sin r.-:r-c:s-io. C-i S-»",o^ 



28 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items 4 and 5 - Files 98-140 and 98-141 



Note: These items were continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of 
May 13, 1998. 



Department: 
Items: 



Amount and 
Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 

File 98-140 - Supplemental appropriation ordinance 
appropriating $1,500,000 of Tobacco Settlement Revenues to 
the Department of Public Health (DPH) Community Health 
Service to fund media, health education, and enforcement 
programs to discourage smoking among minors. 

File 98-141 - Ordinance amending the 1998-99 Annual 
Salary Ordinance to reflect the creation of 2.1 FTE new 
positions in the Department of Public Health (DPH). 



$1,500,000 in proceeds from a Settlement and Consolidation 
Agreement with the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company 
regarding Mangini u. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al. 

On September 9, 1997 a Settlement and Consolidation 
Agreement (Agreement) was reached with R.J. Reynolds 
Tobacco Co. (RJR) in Mangini v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco 
Company, et al. Pursuant to the Agreement, RJR has 
discontinued the Joe Camel Campaign, released documents 
relating to the campaign to the public, and paid $10,000,000 
to the City and County of San Francisco, which served as the 
lead litigator. 

On October 6, 1997 the Board of Supervisors approved a 
resolution to accept funds in the amount of $10,000,000 made 
available in Mangini v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et 
al. and distribute such funds according to the terms of a 
Settlement and Consolidation Agreement (File 194-97-2.1). 
Under the terms of the Agreement, of the total amount of 
$10,000,000, (a) $1,000,000 would be used to compensate San 
Francisco and the 13 other California cities and counties 
which participated in the litigation for public attorney time 
spent on the litigation (File 101-97-53) and (b) $9,000,000 
would be used to finance education, enforcement and 
advertising campaigns by California cities and counties to 
discourage smoking by minors. Of the $9,000,000 to be used 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

for education, enforcement and advertising campaigns, San 
Francisco will receive a total of $1,500,000. The proposed 
ordinance (File 98-140) would appropriate this $1.5 million 
in tobacco settlement revenues to DPH's Communitj- Health 
Services to fund health education, promotion and 
enforcement programs to discourage smoking among minors 
including salaries and other personnel expenses, professional 
services contracts, equipment, office space, and services of 
other departments. 

DPH has developed a detailed description of the planned use 
of the subject supplemental appropriation of $1,500,000 
which is shown as Attachment 1. 

Budget: A budget for the requested $1,500,000, for a 17-month period 

commencing approximately on October 1, 1998 through 
February 31, 2000, is as follows: 

Permanent Salaries: 

1.6 FTE Class 2822 Health Educators @ $1,840 biweekly and 0.5 FTE 

Class 1426 Senior Clerk Typist® $1,223 biweekly for 17 months 

(approximately 37 pay periods) $131,465 

Fringe Benefits (22% of salaries) 28,900 

Employee Field Expense (approx. $38/mo. for 17 mos.) 650 

Professional Services (See Attachment 2) 

Proposal calls for Media, Evaluation, and Community Intervention 

professional services contracts, to be expended in two phases 

($635,500 in Phase 1 and $418,405 in Phase 2, see Comment No. 3). 1,053,905 

Rents and Leases 

Rent for office space located at 1540 Market Street: 400 sq. ft. @ $1.25/sq. ft. 

or $500/month for 17 months (see Comment No. 2) 8,500 

Other Current Expenses (see Attachment 3) 8,735 

Materials and Supplies 

Includes 3 desks @ S600 each, 3 chairs @ $400 each, 3 computer workstations 

@$350 each, 6 file cabinets @ $300 each, and 3 bookshelves @ $200 each $6,450 

Equipment 

3 computers with software @ $2,000 each and 1 printer @ S900 6,900 

Services of Other Departments 

Telecommunications and Information Services 

Installation of 3 phones @ $200/phone and monthly service 

charges for 3 phones @ $135/month for 17 months 2,895 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Purchasing Department 

Mail and Reproduction Services approx. $94 per month for 17 months 1,600 

County Agricultural Weights and Measures (See Attachment 4) 100,000 

Police Department (See Attachment 5 and Comment No. 5) 150,000 

Total $1,500,000 

According to Ms. Alyonik Hrushow of DPH, under the 
proposal, an advisory committee selected by the staff of the 
Tobacco Free Project would be formed, consisting of 
approximately 10-15 members including representatives of 
ethnic communities, youth, tobacco control professionals, the 
City Attorney's Office, and San Francisco Unified School 
District tobacco education or health program offices. The 
advisory committee would review research findings 
regarding effective media and communication targeting 
youth with tobacco prevention messages, including findings 
relating to ethnic diversity. Ms. Hrushow advises that the 
advisory committee will review anti-tobacco television 
advertisements, pertaining to discouraging smoking among 
minors, which have already been produced by other agencies 
throughout the United States. They will evaluate ads b5' 
using research findings, phone surveys of San Francisco 
youth, and focus groups of ethnically and linguistically 
diverse youth to determine if existing advertisements are 
effective. According to Ms. Hrushow, the advisory 
committee will then decide either to use existing 
advertisements and/or direct that new television 
advertisements be developed. 

Comments: 1. The proposed ordinance (File 98-141) would amend the 

1998-99 Annual Salary Ordinance to reflect the creation of 
2.1 FTE, or three, new positions for the DPH as follows: 









Annual 


Annual 








Salary 


Salary 






Biweekly 


Cost® 


Cost® 


Class and Position Title 


FTE 


Salarv 


Step 1 


Step 5 


2822 Health Educator 


1.6 


$1,904- $2,314 


$49,694 


$60,395 


1426 Senior Clerk Typist 


0J5 
2.1 


$1,270 -$1,539 


$33,147 


$40,168 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



The annual cost of the requested 2.1 FTE new positions 
would range from a total of $117,222 at Step 1, including 
salaries of $96,084 and fringe benefits of $21,138, to a total 
of $142,394 at Step 5, including salaries of $116,716 and 
fringe benefits of $25,678. All 2.1 FTE positions have been 
budgeted at Step 1 in this requested supplemental 
appropriation. 

2. According to Ms. Hrushow, $8,500 is required for the 
rental of 400 square feet of office space located at 1540 
Market Street (400 sq. ft. @ $1.25/sq. ft. or $500/month for 17 
months). Ms. Hrushow advises that five employees of DPH's 
Tobacco Free Project, which is funded by Proposition 99 
funds, currently occupy approximately 2,121 square feet of 
space in the building at a rate of $2,651 per month ($1.25/sq. 
ft. per month). According to Ms. Hrushow. the 2.1 FTE new 
employees will share a portion of the space currently leased 
by the Tobacco Free Project. Ms. Hrushow reports that the 
rental monies in the amount of $500 per month is requested 
to reimburse the Tobacco Free Project for the amount of 
space the 2.1 FTE new employees will occupy, approximately 
400 square feet. Therefore this request would not result in 
the rental of any additional space. 

3. The Department has split the expenditures of 
Professional Services under the proposed project into two 
Phases. As shown on Attachment 2, $635,500 of the 
$1,053,905 in Professional Services would be expended in 
Phase 1 and $418,405 in Professional Services would be 
expended in Phase 2. The Department requests that the 
Professional Services monies to be expended in Phase 2, or 
$418,405, be placed on reserve pending the results of an 
evaluation of Phase 1 of the project. 

According to Ms. Hrushow, the Department has not selected 
contractors for the $1,053,905 in Professional Services. Ms. 
Hrushow advises that the contractors for both Phase 1 and 
Phase 2 will be selected on a request for proposal basis and 
that the process will be open to any firm which wants to 
submit a bid. Therefore, Ms. Hrushow states that the 
possibility exists that firms which currently hold contracts 
with DPH's Tobacco Free Project may be selected for the 
proposed new contracts under the subject supplemental 
appropriation. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



4. As noted above, the requested supplemental 
appropriation includes 1.6 FTE 2822 Health Educator 
positions and 0.5 FTE 1426 Senior Clerk Typist position for 
the proposed project for a period of 17 months. Ms. Hrushow 
advises that the three new positions would be eliminated 
after the completion of the project. Therefore, the proposed 
ordinance should be amended to designate the 2.1 FTE 
positions as "L," or Limited Tenure positions. 

5. Under the proposed project the Police Department would 
expend $150,000 to conduct a juvenile tobacco decoy 
operation to identify merchants who are illegally selling 
tobacco to minors. As shown on Attachment 5, such 
enforcement services to be provided by the Police 
Department are budgeted at overtime and include night 
differential premiums. Sgt. Frank Palma of the Police 
Department advises that all Police Department staff are 
currently assigned to duties on a full time basis. According 
to Sgt. Palma, because the proposed project requires officers 
for only 14 hours per week, the Police Department believes 
that the creation of new positions are not justified and that 
the redeployment of personnel would impact current services. 
Therefore, Sgt. Palma advises that existing officers will 
perform the work on an overtime basis, primarily in the 
evening. 

Recommendations: 1. In accordance with Comment No. 3, place $418,405 for 
Phase 2 of the total $1,053,905 in Professional Services on 
reserve pending the results of Phase 1 of the project, as 
requested by the Department (File 98-140). 

2. In accordance with Comment No. 4, amend the proposed 
amendment to the Annual Salary Ordinance (File 98-141) by 
designating the requested 2.1 FTE new positions as "L" or 
Limited Tenure positions (File 98-141). 

3. Approval of the proposed ordinances, as amended, is a 
policy decision for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Attachment 1 
Page 1 of 13 



WORKPLAN FOR MANGINI SETTLEMENT FUNDED PROGRAM 

JULY 23, 1998 



BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON INTERVENTIONS 

Tne proposed youth tobacco prevention plan for supplemental Mangini funding is based on a 
comprehensive approach that utilizes media, enforcement of existing laws designed to discourage 
youth from smoking, and community based interventions. These interventions will complement 
the interventions currently being utilized by the Health Department's Tobacco Free Project with 
Proposition 99 Tobacco Tax Funds through State grants. 

Although prevention of tobacco among youth is a field of study that is still in the developmental 
stages, some conclusions and recommendations have been developed by the Centers for Disease 
Control Office in Smoking and Health, the Surgeon General and the National Center for 
Substance Abuse Prevention. The consensus is that in order to be effective, prevention 
campaigns must Include the following: 

1) Youth-oriented mass media and counter-advertising. 

2) Public policies that reduce use youth access that are actively enforced. 

3) Economic interventions such as increased taxes. 

4) Restriction of tobacco advertising and promotion 

5) Multi component school and community based approaches that include addressing 
social influences. 

6) Tobacco free environment policies which contribute to social norms such that smoking is 
not socially acceptable. 

The interventions included in the proposed Mangini plan will supplement those already being 
provided through Proposition 99 tobacco tax funding, such that all six approaches will be 
utilized, thereby creating a truly comprehensive approach. 

Specifically, there is no citywide youth-oriented mass media campaign conducted on a local 
level. The State Department of Health Services does conduct a statewide media campaign 
focusing on various themes with youth being only one of many target groups. However, the 
media campaign has been subject to political interventions and several rounds of media 
campaigns were delayed for extended periods of time as a result. Media interventions are 
especially important to youth prevention because the effect of tobacco advertising has been 
estimated to have twice the impact of peer pressure and parental smoking in influencing smoking 
initiation. Media messages can provide a mechanism to counter the effects of advertising, 
especially among youth who are heavily exposed to and greatly interested in the media 



f7ah/joecamel/plan79S rev. 7/23/98 

34 



Attachment 1 
Page 2 of 13 



The proposed plan will also fund enforcement of laws that restrict tobacco access to youth and 
outdoor tobacco advertising. The community interventions component will provide the 
community based approaches that can address the psychosocial factors that influence smoking 
initiation, such as social bonding, social support, participation in other health-enhancing - 
behaviors, strengthening self esteem, self efficacy and development of other life skills. 

PREVALENCE OF SMOKING: 

In 1997, the percentage of high school students who reportedly smoked at least one cigarette in 
the last 30 days was lower in California (26.6%) than in the rest of the United States (36.4%). 
Moreover, the prevalence of smoking among San Francisco high school students was even lower 
(19%) in 1997. 

Unfortunately, as with the rest of the nation, California adolescent smoking prevalence rates rose 
steadily between 1992 and 1995. Recent (1996-1997) California data, collected through phone 
surveys rather than high school surveys, suggests that the rate is stabilizing. The 1997 State 
survey showed White youth had the high smoking prevalence, followed by Latino, other, and 
African American. 

The San Francisco Unified School District's data indicate a 9% increase in middle school 
smoking prevalence rates between 1995 and 1997, but a 5% decrease among high school 
students. The California Tobacco Survey phone survey data specific to San Francisco is not 
available for the same time period. Additionally, the San Francisco sample size was too small to 
come to any reliable conclusions. 

Despite limitations of available data, it is possible to make some statements. Teen-age smoking 
continues to be a problem in San Francisco among both girls and boys. All ethnic groups are in 
danger, but the group with the highest prevalence among middle school students is Filipino/ 
Asian Pacific Islander (excluding Chinese) followed by Latinos, Whites, African Americans and 
Chinese. Among high school students, Whites have the highest prevalence followed by 
Filipinos/ Asian Pacific Islander (other than Chinese), Latinos, Chinese, and African Americans. 
Ethnic specific San Francisco school based data is only available for 1997, thus not allowing for 
comparisons with previous years. Attachment 2 provides more prevalence data. Additionally, 
according to state findings, smoking prevalence rates appear to be significantly higher among 
Latino and Asian youth who speak English as their primary language. 

I. MEDIA COMPONENT: 

A. Media Campaign Overview : 

A major media campaign will be implemented to reach youth through major network and 
San Francisco cable access TV programs with young audiences 12-17 years of age. 
Extensive evaluation of the media campaign will be conducted to measure it's impact on 



f7ah/joecamcl/plan79S rev. 7/23/9S 

35 



^tauimpnr | 

Page 3 of 13 



young people. The evaluation component is described under the Evaluation Component 
section. 

The media campaign plan will be implemented by a media contractor selected through 
the competitive bid process. In addition to developing the media plan and securing a 
media buy, the media contractor will provide media promotion services to provide 
visibility and public awareness of the ad campaign. Stories will be pitched to the media 
to generate public discussion of the ads resulting from the successful settlement. The ads 
will be presented as a counter strategy to the tobacco industry's S3 billion advertising and 
promotion expenditures in California. The media contractor will also generate media 
visibility for the other components of the program related to community-based 
interventions and enforcement of laws designed to reduce youth access to tobacco and 
advertising targeting minors. 

The media planning, air time, talent fees and production costs will range from 5567,600 
to $6 15,000. If it is determined that one or two new TV ads need to be developed, 
5150,000 would be budgeted for production costs of the new ads. If it is determined that 
existing ads are satisfactory, then the cost will be 5567,600. 

B. Background On Mass Media Campaigns 



Mass media campaigns are an integral and important part of public health prevention 
programs. The objectives of mass media are to impart knowledge, generate emotion, 
gamer support, stimulate information seeking, and model skills to a specifically defined 
target audience. The ultimate goal of health communication through mass media is to 
lead to behavior change. 

A thorough understanding of the target audience is essential. Messages that are 
carefully adapted to the characteristics, vocabulary, needs and perceptions of the target 
audience are the most persuasive. To achieve this, media campaigns must be based on 
extensive research to ensure a thorough understanding of the intended audience. There 
must also be well defined and specific targets Each target may require different 
messages. In a city as diverse as San Francisco, a diverse campaign is essential. This 
is of particular importance when resources are limited. Stretching finite funds to reach 
as many target audiences as possible is not effective. 

Unfortunately, much is still unknown about what constitutes a successful ad campaign. 
The bulk of current evaluation data is qualitative in nature and cannot be generalized to 
the population as a whole. There is also very limited data available on which 
advertising themes work best with youth from different ethnic backgrounds. Several 
large scale programs have had formal evaluations but some of these had study designs 
with problematic limitations. Additionally, the tobacco industry's budget for 
advertisement and promotion is impossible to match with anu-tobacco campaigns. The 



f7ah/joccamel/plan79S rev. 7/23/9S 

36 



Atta chment 1 
Page 4 of 13 



tobacco industry is constantly developing new ways to promote their product to offset 
positive gains from the anti-tobacco campaign. 

A review of formative research on the effectiveness of different anti-smoking messages 
has been conducted. This review information will be utilized in the development of the 
media campaign. 

C. Recommended Media Strategies: 

A panel of youth marketing experts and researchers convened by the Office on 
Smoking or Health, Centers for Disease Control has drafted strategic guidelines for 
developing successful media campaigns. The panel recommended that multiple media 
messages and the use of multiple channels to repeatedly and consistently deliver 
information is essential to a successful media campaign. The diversity of messages and 
campaigns allows for reaching the diverse population of teens that require different 
creative approaches. A single message efforts risks rejection by a significant proportion 
of teens. 

The panel also recommended that separate media campaigns be designed to target 
younger and older teens with different types of messages. They concluded that 
messages for the younger (1 1-12 year olds) group should be more literal and specific, 
including addressing tobacco and its dangers, as well as aspirational messages of 
lifestyles. Messages for older youth (14-15 year olds) should be more adult and 
interpretive, according to the panel. 

One of the findings of the panel is that youth have a great desire to take control of their 
own lives and strongly reject attempts by anyone, including the media, to dominate or 
direct them. To assure that the campaign addresses youth's needs for empowerment 
and control, the media campaigns will be designed with an advisory committee, 
including youth members that are representative of the cultural diversity in San 
Francisco. Additionally, all ads considered for the media campaign will be tested with 
nine focus groups of youth. Nine different focus groups will be conducted and include 
Asian, Filipino/Pacific Islander, Latino, White, African American, Native American, 
and gay/lesbian/bisexual youth, with appropriate accommodations for younger and 
older youth and for diverse language requirements. 

Outlined below are the outcome objective for the media campaign as well as the major 
proposed activities. 

D. Media Campaign Plan: 

Objective 1: 

A pre and post media campaign telephone survey of 500 randomly selected youth 
between the ages of 12 and 17 years old will be conducted. Post-test results will 



fyah/joccamcl/p!an798 rev. 7/23/98 



Attachment. 1 
Page 5 of 13 



demonstrate a statistically significant increase in intention to quit among smokers and a 
significant decrease in susceptibility to smoke among non-smokers. 

Media Component Activities : 

1 . Department of Public Health (DPH) will develop and issue RFP for media 
contractor. 

2. DPH will select media contractor, request approval from Health Commission and 
Board of Supervisors. 

3. DPH staff -will complete review of relevant research: 

a) Complete compilation of information from researchers currently 
conducting focus groups to evaluate existing TV ads targeting youth 
with anti-tobacco messages developed in California, Arizona, 
Massachusetts, Florida and Minnesota. 

b) Obtain results of work conducted by Connie Pechmann at UC Irvine, 
Professor of Marketing. Pechmann has categorized 194 ads into 8 
approaches and tested them with focus groups in terms of acceptability 

and message conveyed. The next stage of her research will be to look at the ads in 
terms of how they affect susceptibility' to smoke, again using focus groups. The 
results of the second, more substantive phase of research, will be finished in June 
1998. It is assumed that access to the results will be made available for the 
proposed media campaign prior to publication of funding in a journal. 

c) Other research findings will be collected from University of 
North Carolina (22 ads tested for effectiveness of approaches with 
African American and European American youth); Centers for 
Disease Control Office on Smoking and Health; Asher Gould 
(State's media contractor) focus group results on 

California ads; The Columbia Group focus group results on 
California ads; The University of Illinois research on effective 
messages for youth; WHO report on how alcohol is being marketed to 
youth in the media; Centers for Disease Control media literacy; National 
Cancer Institute ASSIST Program. 

4. DPH staff will form advisor)' group for the media and community' -based 
intervention components. The advisory group will include representation from 
ethnic communities including youth, lesbian/gay/bisexual youth, tobacco control 
professionals, city attorney's office, SF Youth Commission, school district tobacco 
education or health programs office. DPH staff will staff and coordinate the 
advisory group. 



f/ah/joecajTiel/plan798 rev. 7/23/98 

38 



Attachment 1 
Page 6 of 13 

5. DPH staff will set criteria with advisory group for reviewing ads based on 
focus group research, other research findings, baseline data, ethnic representation 
and relevance. The advisory group will also be presented media marketing 
information for reaching youth by ethnicity, including language needs. 

6. Advisory group will review ads against criteria and select a set of ads to be 

reviewed by focus groups. 

7. Evaluation contractor will conduct focus groups to assess messages and 
acceptability of ads selected by advisory group. Focus groups will be conducted 
with multiple language capabilities. Advisory committee may find that none of 
the ads meet criteria or that some ads do meet screening criteria but would need to 
be supplemented by a new ad or ads in order to achieve cultural diversity. 

If the decision is made that available existing ads sufficiently meet all criteria, 
then no new ads will be developed. In that case: 

8. Media contractor will identify talent fees for existing ads. Negotiate media buys to 
reach all ethnic groups identified (European American, African American, Latino, 
Asian, Filipino, Pacific Islander, including lesbian/gay/bisexual youth). Obtain ads 
in appropriate formats for various TV stations and tag ads with smokers helpline 
number if appropriate. 

9. Evaluation contractor will make arrangements with statewide teen smokers 
helpline to prepare for extra volume of calls. 

10. Media contractor will implement TV media campaign for 6-9 weeks, depending 
on media buy negotiated and budget constraints, such as fluctuation of air time 
cost throughout the calendar year. 

1 1 . Media contractor will provide report on media coverage to the Department of 
Public Health. 

If it is determined that based on the advisory committee's criteria and results of focus 
groups, that existing ads are not sufficient, then one or two ads will be developed In 
that case: 

8. Evaluation contractor will conduct focus groups to test out concepts and how to 
effectively reach the ethnic groups (ethnic specific vs. multi-cultural ads, language 
needs, etc.) 

9. Evaluation contractor together with Media contractor will conduct focus groups 
to test out drafts of ads (story boards) 

1 0. Media contractor will secure media buy to place ads 

Cah/joccam!:l/plan798 rev. 7/23/98 

39 



Attachment 1 
Page 7 of 13 



1 1 . Media contractor will produce new ad or ads 

12. Media contractor will run ads 

13. Media contractor will provide report on media coverage 

II. EVALUATION COMPONENT: 

A comprehensive evaluation of all components of the Mangini Settlement funded program 
will be conducted. This will include evaluation of: (1) the media campaign designed to 
discourage youth from smoking; (2) the enforcement of San Francisco ordinances banning 
tobacco self-service displays and outdoor tobacco advertising, as well as Penal Code 308a, 
a state law that prohibits tobacco sales to minors; and (3) community-based interventions. 
A baseline and post phone survey of 500 randomly selected youth will be conducted to 
evaluate the impact of the media campaign, including smoking related attitudes and 
behaviors. Nine different focus groups will be conducted to test out existing ads that will 
be selected by an advisory committee based on specific criteria. The focus groups will 
include Asian, Filipino/Pacific Islander, Latino, White, African American, Native 
American, and gay/lesbian/bisexual youth, with appropriate accommodations for younger 
and older youth and for diverse language requirements. An additional nine focus groups 
will be conducted if any new ads are developed to test out the new messages. Additionally, 
evaluation of the media campaign will include examination of data from a statewide teen 
smokers' help-line during the media campaign to determine whether there was a significant 
increase in calls from San Francisco youth during the media campaign which will advertise 
the helpline phone number. 

Outlined below are the outcome objectives and major evaluations activities related to the 
three program components to be implemented by an evaluation contractor. 

A. Evaluation of Media Component 

Objective 2: 

A pre-post media campaign telephone survey of 500 randomly selected youth between 
the ages of 12 and 17 years old will be conducted. Post-test results will demonstrate a 
statistically significant increase in intention to quit among smokers and a significant 
decrease in susceptibility among non-smokers. 

Major Activities for Evaluation of Media Component: 

1 . DPH will develop and issue RPP for evaluation contractor. 

2. DPH will select contractor and request approval from Health Commission and 



f}'ah/joecamcl/plan79S rev. 7/23/98 

40 



Attachment 1 
Page 8 of 13 



Board of Supervisors. 

3. Evaluation contractor will determine what data will be available from smokers' 

helpline and negotiate access to data as appropriate. 

4. Evaluation contractor will design telephone survey instruments and protocols for 

youth. 

5. Evaluation contractor will determine sampling methods for survey. 

6. Evaluation contractor will conduct random phone survey of 1,000 12-17 year old 
youth to create baseline data. In addition to demographic data, language and TV 
viewing practices will be identified, as well as attitudes and behaviors related to 
smoking, including susceptibility to smoking. 

7. Evaluation contractor will conduct focus groups to assess messages and 
acceptability of ads selected by advisory committee. Advisory committee may find 
that some of the ads meet criteria or that some ads do meet some criteria but would 
not achieve cultural diversity or contain messages appropriate for certain ethnic 
groups. Nine different focus groups will be conducted to test out existing ads that 
will be selected by an advisory committee based on specific criteria. The focus 
groups will include Asian, Filipino/Pacific Islander, Latino, White, African 
American, Native American, and gay/lesbian/bisexual youth, with appropriate 
accommodations for younger and older youth and for diverse language 
requirements. 

8. If existing ads do not adequately meet all criteria, evaluation contractor will 
conduct an additional nine focus groups as described above to test new messages . 
for new ads. 

9. After media TV campaign is aired, evaluation contractor will conduct phone survey 
of the baseline sample of 1,000 12-17 year old youth to obtain data regarding ad 
recall, response, attitudes and behaviors, including susceptibility to smoking. 

10. Evaluation contractor will obtain teen smokers helpline data for pre and during 
media campaign. 

B. Evaluation of Enforcement Component 

Enforcement of self service and outdoor tobacco advertising ordinances (Department of 
Weights and Measures) 

Objective 3: 



Cah/joccamcl/plan798 rev. 7/23/98 

41 



Attachment. 1 
Page 9 of 13 



A tracking system will be -developed in collaboration with the Department of Weights 
and Measures to document the number of complaints received and follow up actions 
including number of site visits, notices of violations, requirements of correction issues, 
and number of referrals to the City Attorney. 

Evaluation Activities: 

Evaluation tasks will include working with Department of Weights and Measures 
personnel to track activities outlined in the enforcement plan to assure that enforcement 
data, including outcomes, is collected and reported. Enforcement data will be 
complemented by the compliance survey data collected by Tobacco Free Project during 
random compliance checks. 

C. Evaluation of Community Based Interventions : 

Objective 4: 

The objectives and evaluation plan for the community based interventions will be 
developed with input from the advisory committee and community based agencies 
funded to provide interventions. 

Evaluation Activities: 

Evaluation methods used by the Evaluation contractor will include: (1) follow-up; and 
(2) a control or comparison group. Evaluation tasks will include: 

1 . Develop a protocol to measure changes in youth's relevant beliefs, attitudes, 
behaviors, skills and to track their smoking behaviors and susceptibility to 
smoking. 

2. Comprise a control/comparison group of similar youth not receiving the 
intervention. 

3. Administer the protocol at the beginning and end of the intervention to both 
groups of youth. 

4. Determine whether the intervention has been successful. 

5. Conduct a 6 month follow-up to determine if youth are still not smoking, 
changed their susceptibility to smoking and have retained their acquired 
skills/attitudes/behaviors/beliefs. 

III. ENFORCEMENT COMPONENT: 



Cah/joccamcl/plan798 rev. 7/23/98 

42 



Attachment J, 
Page 10 of 13 



A. Department of Weights and Measures will enforce the San Francisco ordinances that: 
(1) prohibit self-service tobacco merchandising displays and require vender assisted 
sales; and (2) prohibit outdoor tobacco advertising displays in publicly visible locations 
except within 660 feet of highways. 

Objective 5: 

The compliance rate with the tobacco self service and outdoor advertising ordinance 
will increase by 50% among those non-compliers identified in a baseline survey. The 
overall compliance rate for the self service displays will be maintained at 90%. The 
Tobacco Free Project will conduct random compliance surveys and refer non-compliers 
for follow up to the Department of Weights and Measures. 

1. Activities: 

A. The Department of Weights and Measures will follow up on complaints and 
referrals about store fronts that publicly advertise brand name cigarettes and 
billboards located in areas not exempted by the advertising ordinance or 
preempted by state law. Complaints and referrals may come from the following 
sources: 

1. Complaint hot-line. 

2. Referrals from random compliance surveys conducted by the Tobacco 
Free Project and other agencies such as the city attorney and SFPD. 

3. Referrals from Weights and Measures device inspectors who will discuss 
the tobacco ordinance requirements with businesses not in compliance, 
document the discussion, and refer the matter to the tobacco sign 
inspector. 



fyah/joccamcfplar^S rev. 7/23/98 

A3 



Attachment 1 
Page 11 of 13 



B. Conduct Initial Inspections : 



Upon receiving complaint or referral, an inspector will make an on-site inspection 
to document the violation, determine the identity of the responsible person, take 
photographs, and issue a Notice Requiring Correction (NRC). _ . 

C. Non-Compliance : 

After 48 hours, the inspector will return to the site for a follow-up visit and will 
issue a "pass" certificate of inspection. The location will not be revisited except on 
a complaint or referral basis or annually if the business has a registered commercial 
device. 

If the establishment fails to comply with the Notice Requiring Correction, a Notice 
of Violation (NOV) will be issued. A follow up visit for the NOV will be 
conducted after 48 hours. If the establishment is not in compliance, the maner will 
be referred to the city attorney. 

If the establishment complies with the Notice Requiring Correction, but a new 
violation has occurred (i.e. - a Marlboro sign has been replaced by a Camel sign), 
then another Notice Requiring Correction will be issued for follow up to be 
conducted after 48 hours. 

If three Notices Requiring Correction are issued within a month to the same 
establishment, the maner will be referred to the city attorney. 

D. Certified Mailing: 

If the responsible person is not on the premise at the time of inspection, he/she will 
be notified by certified mailing after each Notice Requiring Correction or Notice of 
Violation is issued. 

E. Billboards: 

There are three primary billboard vendors operating in the city. Weights and 
Measures will respond to complaints and referrals by sending a certified mailing to 
the vendors detailing the violation, the location of the billboard, and specifying at 
least 5 days for correction. The department will return for an inspection after the 
specified date. If the billboard vendor fails to comply, the department will send a 
Notice of Violation via certified mailing and refer the matter to the city attorney. 



f/ah/joecamcl'p!an798 rev. 7/23/98 

44 



Attachment. 1 
Page 12 of 13 



F. Self Service Merchandising: 

The Department of Weights and Measures will receive and review complaints and 
within 30 days of receipt, will serve a Notice Requiring Correction to the_business. 
After a specified time, the department will follow up on the notice. If the business 
fails to comply, the matter will be referred to the city attorney. 

G. Penalties and Investigative Cost Recovery: 

For self service merchandise and tobacco sign enforcement, the penalties are paid 
to the Treasury of the City and County of San Francisco. Also, the city attorney 
may recover costs in bringing any civil action to enforce the provisions of this 
section. The department is willing to enter agreements with the city attorney's 
office to conduct investigations and recover costs after settlement of a civil action. 

H. Databases and Reports: 

The Department of Weights and Measures will collaborate with the Department of 
Health to set up a database to track the number of complaints and referrals 
received, on site inspections, work hours, notices issued, and other data which may 
help to evaluate the effectiveness of this plan. At least on a quarterly basis, the 
department will submit a report to the Department of Public Health to assist in its 
evaluation of the plan., 

I. A media plan to be implemented by media contractor will be developed in 
collaboration between Weights and Measures and the Tobacco Free Project to 
educate the public and retailers about the enforcement program. 

B. Enforcement Of Illegal Tobacco Sales To Minors By Police Department 

Objective 6: 

The illegal tobacco sales rate among non-compliers identified by the Tobacco Free 
Project compliance surveys will be reduced by 50% following Police Department follow 
up action. The overall illegal tobacco sales rate will decrease from 16% to 10%. 

A juvenile tobacco decoy operation will be conducted by the Police Department's Vice 
Crimes Division, which currently operates a juvenile alcohol decoy program with state 
grant funds. A tobacco component will be integrated into the Unit's operations. 

Activities: 

Activities to be implemented by the Police Department will include: 



Cah/joccajncl/plan798 rev. 7/23/9S 

45 



Attach ment. 1 
Page 13 of 13 



A. Coordination with the District Attorney regarding immunity for juvenile 
decoys. 

B. Recruitment of personnel, including officers and youth decoys. 

C. Coordination with the Legal Division regarding parental consent and save 
harmless agreements. 

D. Training of officers and decoys. Bilingual officers and youth decoys will be 
recruited for enforcement targeting AAPI and Hispanic/Latino communities. 

E. Coordination with the Department of Public Health on media and public 
awareness activities. 

F. Conducting of self-initiated tobacco decoy operations. 

G. Conducting tobacco decoy operations in response to referrals from the 
Department of Public Health following identification of non-compliers 
during random compliance surveys. 

H. Responding to complaints from members of the public regarding tobacco 
sales to minors by tobacco decoy operations. 

I. Referring violations to the California Dispute Services for civil hearings. 

J. Record keeping and provision of monthly reports summarizing 
enforcement activities. 

IV. COMMUNITY BASED INTERVENTIONS COMPONENT 

The objectives for this component of the program will be developed by DPH staff with 
advisory group input based on the examination of the latest research findings on tobacco 
prevention strategies, including research on ethnic and cultural appropriateness. The 
community based interventions will address some of those factors that appear to protect 
youth from smoking such as positive self-image and participation in extra curricular 
activities. 

An RFP will be developed with input from the ad\isory group and issued by DPH staff to 
assure that interventions are provided to youth that represent the cultural and gender identity 
diversity of San Francisco. It is anticipated that four or five community based agencies 
would be funded to assure that Asian, Filipino, Pacific Islander, African American, Latino, 
and European American youth are all served, including lesbian/gay/bisexual youth. 



i/ah.f]ozcam:Vp\anl9S rev. 7/23/98 

46 



Attachment 2 
Page 1 of 2 



PHASE I* 
PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR MANGINI PROJECT 

I. Evaluation: _ 

A. . Media Campaign 

1 . Nine (9) focus groups @ $2,500 each. i^puu 

Nine different focus groups will include Asian, 
Filipino/Asian Pacific Islander, Latino, White, African 
American , Native American and gay/bisexual youth, with 
appropriate accommodations for younger and older youth 
and for diverse language requirements. 

2. Baseline random phone survey of 500 12-17 year 562,500 

olds in SF @ $125 per survey, requiring 50,000 calls to get 
500 completed interviews. 

3. Post media campaign follow-up phone survey of same $40,500 

500 adolescents @ $81.00 per completed survey. 

B. Evaluation of Enforcement Component. $7,500 

C. Evaluation of Community Intervention Component. $25,000 

Subtotal $158,000 

II. Media 

A. Talent fees for two or three existing ads. Asians, African $ 20,000 

Americans, Latinos and Caucasians will all be represented 

B. Media placement of 2 or 3 TV spots $442,500 

C Media contractor's time for plan development and 15.000 

implementation 

Subtotal: $477,500 

Total: $635,500 



*The total amount earmarked for professional services is $1,053,905. 
A balance of $418,405 would be placed on reserve for Phase II. 



L:\SUPLMNTL\tobacco_alyonik.doc rev.8/13/98 , 



Attachment 2 
Paee 2 of 2 



PHASED* 

PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR MANGINI PROJECT 

TO BE HELD ON RESERVE 

Distribution of Funds to be Approved by Finance Committee 

The balance allocated for professional services in the amount of $418,405 will be distributed 
according to recommendations made through community consultation and based on focus groups 
and telephone surveys. 

Range 

1. Community Based Interventions $ 273,405-335,805 

Funding for 4-5 community based agencies to reach Asian, 

Filipino, Pacific Islander, African American, Latino, European $ 82,600- 122,500 

American and gay/lesbian youth @ S64.400 - 580,000 per 

contract. 

2. Media Component 

Additional funds for the media component If it is determined that 
new ads need to be developed for the media campaign, then 
$122,500 would be allocated for production of one or two new ads. 
If no new ads are required, savings from media production 
($122,500) and additional focus group savings ($22,500) would be 
reallocated for (a) media placement (SS2,600) to assure that 
optimal frequency and reach are achieved with all target groups; 
and (b) community based interventions ($62,400) funded through 
the competitive process. 

3. Evaluation Component SO- 22,500 

If it is decided that new ads should be developed, an additional 
nine different focus groups @S2,500 each will be required to 

test out new messages. 

They will include Asian, Filipino/ Asian Pacific Islander, 

Latino, White, African American , Native American and 

gay/bisexual youth, with appropriate accommodations for 

younger and older youth and for diverse language 

requirements. 

Total available: $418.405 
*The total amount earmarked for professional services is $1,053,905. 



L:\SUPLMNTL\tobacco alvonik.doc rev.S/ 13/98 

48 



Attachment 3 



Department of Public Health 
Supplemental Appropriation Tobacco Settlement 

BUDGET JUSTD7ICATION 

PERSONNEL: 

1.6 FTE Health Educators for 17 months at step 1 and 0.5 FTE Sr. Clerk Typist: 

Under supervision of Tobacco Free Project Director, the full time Health Educator will conduct 
planning and implementation related to the media, evaluation, enforcement components. 
Responsibilities will include developing RFPs, contract negotiations, contract monitoring, 
working with city departments responsible for enforcement and evaluation contractor to develop 
and implement tracking "of funded enforcement activities. The 0.6 FTE Health Educator will 
work on the community based interventions component, including development of RFPs, 
contract development and monitoring, and provision of technical assistance and training to 
contractors. The 0.5 FTE Senior Clerk Typist will provide clerical support for the health 
education staff and project. 

Other Current Expenses Detail 

Description 

Freight (e.g. express mail, other courier svcs) $ 500 

Advertising (1) . 2,700 

Copy Machine @ SlOO/mo x 17 months x 1/2 use 850 

Printing @ $50/month x 1 7 months 850 

Subscriptions 300 

Other Current Expense (2) 1 ,73 5 

Other Misc (3) 1.800 

Total $ 8,735 

(1) Includes $1,200 for RFP notices @ $400 each x 3; $1,500 for recruitment ads @ $500 
each x 3 ads. 

(2) $800 for refreshments for youth participating in incentive programs and other community 
anti-tobacco events; $935 for costs associated with participation in other events for 
outieach/recruitment/cornmunity visibility purposes (booth rentals, registration fees, 
sponsorship fees). 

(3) Includes purchase of health education materials such as curricula, pamphlets, videos @ 
$400; $800 for office supplies; $400 for printer toner and $200 for cartridges. 



L:\SUPLMNTL\tobacco_alyonik.doc rev.8/13/98 



Attachment 4 



WORK ORDERS TO OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS FOR ENFORCEMENT 



A. DEPARTMENT OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 



Work order to the Department of Weights and Measures for enforcement of ordinances 
prohibiting tobacco self-service displays and outdoor advertising. 



Personnel: Salaries and Fringe Benefits (a) 22% Amount 

1.0 FTE X 12 months 6220 Inspector $52,029 

1.0 FTEX 12 months 1426 Senior Clerk Typist 47.158 

S99,187 



Operating Expenses: 

Polaroid Camera SI 00 

Hotline Telephone 250 (for monthly service fees for 12 months) 

Pager 100 

Cell Phone 100 

Cell Phone service 263 (for monthly service fee for 12 months) 

S813 

NOTE: Additional operating expenses in the amount of $35,237 will be requested 
from the Board of Supervisors to supplement Mangini funds. 



TOTAL: S100,000 



L:\SUPLMNTL\tobacco_alyonik.doc rev.8/13/98 c n 



Attachment £ 



WORK ORDERS TO OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS FOR ENFORCEMENT 

B. POLICE DEPARTMENT 

Work order to the Police Department for enforcement of state law prohibiting tobacco 
and tobacco paraphernalia sales to minors, Penal Code 308a_ 

Personnel costs 



Police Department Hourly Salary Rate: (Includes overtime and night premium). All rates 
are estimated: 

Rank July 1. 1998 January 1. 1999 

Police Officer (Q4 step 5) $44.14/hr. $44.80/hr. 

Sergeant (Q52) $51.24/hr. $52.00/hr. 

Juvenile Decoy $6.00/hr. $6.00/hr. 
Operations from July 1. 1998 to December 31, 1998 (based on a fourteen hour week): 

2 - Police Officers @ S44.14/hr. = $88.28 

1- Sergeant @ S51.24/hr = 51.24 

2 -Decoys @ $ 6.00/hr - 12.00 

$151.52 x 336 hours = S50,911 

Operations from January 1, 1999 to November 30, 1999 (based on a fourteen hour week): 

2 - Police Officers @ $44.80/hr. = $89.60 

1 - Sergeant @ $52.00/hr = 52.00 

2 - Decoys @ $ 6.00/hr = 12.00 

$153.60 x 616 hours = $94,618 

Operating expenses: 

Equipment: Computer including associated hardware and software $ 4,471 

TOTAL: $150,000 



L:\SUPLMNTL\tobacco_alyonik.doc rev.8/13/98 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 6 -File 98-1482 



Department: 
Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 



Sheriffs Department 
Controller 

Ordinance appropriating $240,272 of Public Protection 
Revenue Special Fund for the purchase of computer 
hardware and software and a fax machine, for FY 1998- 
99. 

$240,272 

Public Protection Revenue Special Fund. Section 26731 of 
the Government Code requires that $3.00 of each fee, as 
specified in Section 26731, collected by the Sheriffs Civil 
Division shall be deposited into a special fund in the 
county treasury. According to Sergeant Edwin James of 
the Sheriffs Department, these funds may be used for 
equipment purchases for the Sheriffs Civil Division and 
also for equipment purchases for the Sheriffs Central 
Warrants Bureau, which also processes civil abstracts and 
warrants. 



Description: 



The' proposed ordinance would appropriate $240,272 in 
Public Protection Revenue Special funds to the Sheriffs 
Department. According to Chief Jan Dempsey of the 
Sheriffs Department, the funds would be used to (a) 
upgrade computer hardware and software used by the 
Civil Division of the Sheriffs Department, costing 
$210,028; (b) purchase computer hardware and software 
for the Sheriffs Central Warrants Bureau costing 
$25,894; and (c) purchase a fax machine for the Sheriffs 
Central Warrants Bureau, costing $4,350. 

Pursuant to the California Civil Code of Procedures, the 
Sheriff is charged with the responsibility of collecting fees, 
maintaining records, disbursing payments and enforcing 
court orders. The Civil Division of the Sheriffs 
Department collects and disburses over $7.5 million 
annually and collects approximately $600,000 in fees for 
deposit into the General Fund. According to Chief 
Dempsey, the current computer system used by the Civil 
Division is not year 2000 compliant and personnel in the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



52 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Civil Division of the Sheriffs Department currently have 
to manually track cases that span beyond the year 2000 
as the current computer system is not capable of such 
tracking. Chief Dempsey advises that the current 
computer hardware used by the Civil Division is old and 
in need of replacement. Chief Dempsey states that the 
Sheriffs Department has difficulty finding repair 
companies given the age of the hardware. Funds are 
requested to upgrade this computer hardware and 
software, costing $210,028. 

The Sheriffs Department also requests that funds be 
appropriated for the purchase of computer hardware and 
software, costing $25,894 for the Department's Central 
Warrants Bureau (CWB). The Sheriffs Department CWB 
is responsible for running computer checks on every 
individual who is arrested in San Francisco to determine 
if there are any outstanding warrants for these 
individuals. According to Chief Dempsey, the current 
computer system being used by the Sheriffs CWB was 
previously used by the Police Department and is 
antiquated and frequently in a state of disrepair. 
Repairing the equipment is costly because parts are not 
readily available. Chief Dempsey also states that the 
current computer system used by the Sheriffs CWB is not 
compatible with the Sheriffs other internal computer 
systems. 

Funds are also requested for the purchase of a high 
resolution fax machine for the Sheriffs CWB costing 
$4,350. The fax machine would be capable of transmitting 
and receiving color photographs and fingerprints suitable 
for confirmation of identification. Chief Dempsey states 
that this type of fax is required for the Sheriffs CWB in 
order to meet its legal obligation to confirm, in a timely 
manner, evidence of identification to prevent false arrest. 
Prior to June 1997, the Central Warrants Bureau was 
under the jurisdiction of the Police Department and had 
the use of the necessary fax machine. Since June 1997, 
when the CWB was transferred from the Police 
Department to the Sheriffs Department, the Sheriffs 
Department has not had access to the necessary fax 
machine and has been unable to fulfill its legal obligation 
to confirm evidence of identification in a timely manner. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



According to Chief Dempsey, the CWB is currently using 
a fax machine that does not provide clear identification to 
meet the legal evidentiary requirements and as such the 
CWB has had to rely on the Police Department to confirm 
identification. 



Budget: 



Attachment 1 provided by Sergeant Edwin James of the 
Sheriffs Department, contains a budget for the computer 
equipment and fax machine, together with an explanation 
for each item. 



Comment: 



Recommendations: 



Ms. Gwen Gee of the Committee on Information 
Technology (COIT), advises that, the computer equipment 
related to the $235,922 portion ($240,272 less $4,350 for 
the fax machine) of this request has not yet been 
approved by COIT. Ms. Gee advises that such approval is 
required prior to the appropriation of funds for the 
proposed procurement of the computer equipment by the 
Sheriffs Department. The Department of 

Telecommunications and Information Services (DTIS) 
supports the procurement of the proposed computer 
equipment (see Attachment 2), however COIT staff 
approval is also required. As such, the ordinance should 
be amended to reserve the $235,922 pending COIT 
approval. 

1. In accordance with the above comment, amend the 
proposed supplemental appropriation ordinance to reserve 
$235,922 of the requested $240,272, pending COIT 
approval. 

2. Approve the proposed ordinance, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

54 



City and County of San Francisco 



OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF 




Attachment 1 
f&ge I of 2 



Michael Hennessey 
SHERIFF 

(415) 554-7225 



September 1 6, 1998 
Rcf.:FS/l 98-152 

Justine Nolan 
Budget Analyst Office 
1390 Market Street 
San Francisco. CA 94102 

Dear Ms. Nolan, 

In response to your questions concerning the Public Protection Revenue Special Fund; 

The Sheriffs Department requests the appropriation of $240,272 from the Sheriffs Public 
Protection Revenue Special Fund for costs associated with the purchase of new hardware, 
software and a fax machine as detailed below: 

Civil Division: 

20 Computers and 6 Printers $75,000 

Civil Automation Software (Year 2000 Compliant) $70,228 

2 System Server Units $44,800 

Installation of hard wiring for Local Area Network $20.000 

$210,028 

This system is to replace an antiquated system that is continuously experiencing problems 
because the technology is old and terminals cannot be repaired. The Sheriffs Department Civil 
Division is responsible for collecting fees, maintaining records, disbursing payments and 
enforcing court orders. It is imperative for the Sheriffs Department to have a system that is year 
2000 compliant and able to handle the daily civil process data without breaking down 
continously which could cause serious delays resulting in possible legal action. 



633 FOLSOM STREET. ROOM IfiO 



SAN FRANCISCO, CA. M107 



FAX NUMBER (4 1 S) 5S+-TOS0 



55 



Pase 2 of 2 



Central Warrants Bureau (CWB) Division: 

1 Computers and 5 Printers $20,015 

Associated Software and Related Items $5.879 

$25,894 

CWB processes civil and criminal abstracts and warrants 24 hours a day for the City and County 
of San Francisco. This documentation is vital to vertify lawful arrests and detentions fh^t occur 
several thousand times a day by law enforcement personnel throughout the United States and 
International jurisdictions. The current system at CWB is also antiquated and will not have full 
function capabilities to interface with a new system that State of California is implementing at 
the beginning of the new year. 

1 Nefax 791 Fax Machine $4,350 

Currently, CWB personnel have to request data be forwarded to a Police Department fax 
machine (the same we are requesting) to obtain the quality needed to identify fingerprints and 
photographs for verification purposes. This results in time being spent in personnel leaving their 
unit to go to another department to retrieve information. As stated previously, this information is 
being faxed on a 24 hour basis as arrests and booking of individuals are constantly taking place. 

Total Requested $240,272 

Mr. Rod Loucks, Deputy Director for Application Development, is in the process of forwarding 
over a letter supporting the need for the Sheriffs Department to obtain this system. 

The name of the account for this supplemental appropriation is the Public Protection Special 
Revenue Fund. There have been projects attached to this particular account that had different 
names in previous years. However, it is all under the Public Protection Special Revenue Fund 
even though it has been referred as the Sheriffs Civil Equipment Fund. 

Thank you for your assistance and please call if questions arise. 

Sincerely, 

EDWIN^AMES, SERGEANT 
Financial Services Manager 



Page 2 of 2 







.". _ 3r =n»irr's yzj-HKirtrsi 41i> 554 7BS0 P. 64 

Attachmsrit 2 
Department of Telecommunications and Information Services 
City and County of San Francisco 



September 16, 1298 



Justine Nolan 

Harvey Rose Office 

San Francisco Board of Supervisors 

1390 Market Street, Room 1025 

San Francisco, CA 94102 



Dear Ms. Nolan, 



For the past 14 years, DTIS has been supporting the Sheriffs Civil Division by 
implementing and supporting a civil accounting system for them, the system runs on 
our IBM mainframe at One Market Piaza Data Center. 

A few years ago we became aware that the system is not year 2000 compliant, and we 
determined that the cost of making it compliant would be prohibitive. As a result, my 
staff has been working closely with the Sheriff Office in researching and identifying 
alternative systems. Recently a decision was made by the Shenff to migrate to one of 
the systems we helped identify. The system they choose requires a local area network 
(LAN). 

DTIS fully supports the Sheriffs request for funds for the software and hardware to 
replace the current system with the new system. We will continue to work closely with 
the Sheriffs office to migrate, convert and assist in the implementation of the new 
system. Implementation of this new system is time critical because we expect that by 
the end of this calendar year the current civil accounting system will fail due to year 
2000 deficiencies. 

If I can provide any additional information, please feel free to call me at 554-0693. 



Jeputy Director 
for Application Development 

cc: Ron Hass, Pedro Martinez, Julia Friedlander, Sgt James 



415-5*4-0300 875 Stevenson Street . Fifth Floor . Ban Francisco . CA 94103-0848 fax 415-554-4733 

SEP-16-1993 16=33 4155544733 95* P.B2 

TOTAL P.B4 
57 




Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 7 - File 98-1483 



Department: 
Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Ordinance appropriating S2, 887, 609 of Realty Trust 
Funds to reimburse the San Francisco County 
Transportation Authority for funds used to purchase 
the Rincon Park portion of the Marine Terminals 
Corporation parcel, and for the construction of the 
Mid-Embarcadero Surface Roadway and the Mid- 
Embarcadero Surface Street Improvement projects 
for FY 1998-99. 

$2,887,609 

Realty Trust Funds (From the sale of Lot 33, 
Assessors Block 3741 sold by the City to the San 
Francisco Redevelopment Agency for $4,000,000) 

The proposed supplemental appropriation for 
$2,887,609 would repay a $2,137,702 loan made by 
the San Francisco County Transportation Authority 
to the City. The loan proceeds were used by the City 
to purchase land for Rincon Park. This supplemental 
appropriation ordinance would also fund $749,907 to 
pay for various surface street improvements that are 
associated with the Mid-Embarcadero Roadway 
Project. 

In 1990, the Board of Supervisors approved a 
resolution endorsing the demolition of the 
Embarcadero Freeway, due to the severe damage 
caused by the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. 
Subsequently, in 1991, Senate Bill (SB) 181 was 
approved by the California Legislature, which 
transferred the right-of-way and maintenance 
requirements of the Embarcadero Freeway from 
Caltrans to the City and County of San Francisco. SB 
181 also required that San Francisco use the right-of- 
way property or the proceeds from the sale of the 
right-of-way property to construct a system of local 
streets and related amenities as an alternative to the 
elevated Embarcadero Freeway. The right-of-way 
parcels from the Embarcadero Freeway included Lot 
33, Assessor Block 3741, located between Steuart 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

and Folsom Streets, adjacent to the Embarcadero. In 
1997, the City sold this parcel to the San Francisco 
Redevelopment Agency for $4,000,000. 

In August of 1992, the City purchased property 
located at 261-289 Steuart Street at a cost of 
$7,285,678 from the Marine Terminals Corporation 
for the Mid-Embarcadero Roadway Project, the 
MUNI Metro Extension Project, the MUNI Metro 
Turnback Project and the creation of Rincon Park. In 
order to complete this purchase, the Transportation 
Authority loaned $4,558,200 to DPW to assist in 
funding (1) the Embarcadero Roadway Project, which 
was allocated $2,420,498 of the loan amount, and (2) 
to pay $2,137,702 of the total acquisition cost of 
$3,314,983 to purchase the land for Rincon Park, 
which is within the geographical boundaries of the 
Mid-Embarcadero Roadway Project. In return, DPW 
agreed to reimburse the Transportation Authority 
with any funds which the City might receive from 
Federal, State or local sources, if such monies were 
eligible to be used for funding the Embarcadero 
Roadway Project. 

Of the total $4,558,200 loaned by the Transportation 
Authority to DPW, to date, DPW has reimbursed the 
Transportation Authority $1,758,515 in Federal 
Highway Administration (FHWA) funds for the 
Embarcadero Roadway portion of the acquisition 
cost. This requested supplemental appropriation will 
reimburse the Transportation Authority an 
additional $2,137,702. As reflected in Attachment 1, 
the remaining $661,983 is being funded through the 
Transportation Authority's H cent Sales Tax 
revenues. 

Since Rincon Park, which is located on the 
Embarcadero at Folsom Street, is within the Mid- 
Embarcadero Roadway Project's boundaries, DPW 
has determined that the Rincon Park acquisition 
costs are eligible to be financed with SB 181 funding. 
As described above, SB 181 requires that the 
proceeds from the sale of right-of-way property (i.e., 
Lot 33, Assessor Block 3741) be used only for 
Embarcadero Roadway related projects. Therefore, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

59 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

DPW is requesting, under this proposed legislation, 
to repay the Transportation Authority $2,137,702 for 
the Rincon Park advance from a portion of the 
$4,000,000 in proceeds received from the 
Redevelopment Agency from the sale of Lot 33, 
Assessor Block 3741. 

In addition, in 1996, the Board of Supervisors 
approved (1) the Mid-Embarcadero Surface Roadway 
Project, (2) the Mid-Embarcadero Surface Street 
Improvement Project and (3) the Fremont and 
Fourth Street Ramp Modification Project, as the 
alternate system of local streets to replace the 
Embarcadero Freeway. These three projects are 
being designed and constructed separately. The 
proposed supplemental appropriation addresses the 
second project, the Surface Street Improvement 
projects, by funding $749,907 of this subject request 
of $2,887,609 for surface street improvements 
associated with the Mid-Embarcadero Roadway 
Project. The status of the other two projects are 
discussed below in Comment 4. 

The design of the Mid-Embarcadero Surface Street 
Improvement Project is currently proceeding and 
DPW anticipates beginning construction of the 
Project in early 1999. This project includes roadway 
reconstruction, new signalized intersections and 
other traffic improvements in the downtown area. As 
shown in Attachment 2, the estimated total cost of 
the Mid-Embarcadero Surface Street Improvement 
Project is $11,089,731. This includes $8,859,525 of 
Federal funds and $1,480,299 of State funds, leaving 
a shortfall of $749,907, which, together with the 
requested $2,137,702, is the subject of this request. 
Attachment 2, provided by DPW identifies the 
budget breakdown, including the funding sources for 
the $11,089,731 total cost for the Mid-Embarcadero 
Surface Street Improvement Project. 

Budget: Repayment of Loan to Transportation Authority $2,137,702 

Mid-Embarcadero Surface Street Project 749.907 

Total $2,887,609 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

60 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Tina Olson of DPW, the 

Transportation Authority loaned $4,558,200 to DPW 
for the Embarcadero Roadway Project and the 
purchase of Rincon Park because DPW did not have 
these funds available at the time. 

2. Lot 33, Assessor's Block 3741, which the City sold 
to the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency for 
$4,000,000, was part of a larger piece of property 
purchased by the Redevelopment Agency for the Gap 
Inc. to develop the Gap Inc. headquarters office 
building. Of the total $4,000,000 received by the 
City, $23,252 was for escrow costs, leaving a 
remaining balance of $3,976,748. According to DPW, 
the proposed supplemental appropriation will 
authorize (a) $2,137,702 of these funds to repay the 
loan made by the Transportation Authority and (b) 
$749,907 to cover the remaining costs for the Mid- 
Embarcadero Surface Street Improvements leaving a 
remaining balance of $1,089,139 from the $4,000,000 
sale. According to Ms. Olson, the remaining balance 
of $1,089,139 would be the subject of a future 
supplemental appropriation request, after the 
completion of the sale of other SB 181 Embarcadero 
Freeway land parcels and after DPW determines the 
remaining funding requirements for the Mid- 
Embarcadero Roadway Project. 

3. According to Mr. David Madway of the 
Redevelopment Agency, as of September 3, 1998, the 
Gap Inc. purchased Lot 33, Assessor's Block 3741 
from the Redevelopment Agency to build its 
headquarters office building. Mr. Madway reports 
that in addition to the $4,000,000 purchase price for 
the land, the Gap Inc. paid the Redevelopment 
Agency $4,212,000 for an Affordable Housing 
component, based on 520,000 square feet of office 
space at $8.10 per square foot. According to Mr. 
Madway, the Gap Inc. started construction of the 
office building last week, and it is anticipated that 
the building would be completed by the Spring of 
2001. 

Furthermore, as part of an agreement between the 
Gap Inc., the Redevelopment Agency and the City. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

61 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

the City agreed to purchase the land for Rincon Park, 
and the Gap Inc. agreed to fund the construction and 
maintenance for ten years of the park. Mr. Madway 
reports that the construction of Rincon Park is 
estimated to cost $2,000,000 and the maintenance is 
estimated at an annual cost of $100,000 for a total 
maintenance cost of approximately $1,000,000 over 
ten years. After the ten year period, Mr. Madway 
indicates that the Redevelopment Agency will be 
responsible for funding the ongoing maintenance of 
the park, from the additional tax increment funds 
generated by the Gap Inc. office building. According 
to Mr. Madway, the Gap Inc. office building is 
estimated to generate approximately an additional 
$2,000,000 annually in tax increment funding for the 
Redevelopment Agency. 

4. The other two projects, which are not part of this 
supplemental appropriation ordinance, which were 
recommended by the Board of Supervisors as the 
alternate system of local streets to replace the 
Embarcadero Freeway that was damaged in the 
Loma Prieta earthquake include (1) the Mid- 
Embarcadero Surface Roadway Project and (2) the 
Fremont and Fourth Street Ramp Modification 
Project. The construction of the Mid-Embarcadero 
Surface Roadway Project began in July of 1998. This 
project is fully funded with Federal Emergency Relief 
funds, State Flexible Congestion Relief funds and 
local Vi Sales Tax funds from the Transportation 
Authority at a total estimated project cost of 
approximately $70 million. The Fremont and Fourth 
Street Ramp Modification Project will be designed 
and constructed by Caltrans using Federal 
Emergency Relief funds and other State funds at a 
total estimated project cost of approximately $20 
million. 

5. According to Ms. Olson, if the proposed 
supplemental appropriation ordinance for $2,887,609 
is not approved, the repayment of the $2,137,702 
loan to the Transportation Authority and the 
$749,907 cost to pay for various surface street 
improvements for the Mid-Embarcadero Roadway 
Project would have to come from DPWs allocation of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



the Vi cent Sales Tax revenues. Alternatively, such Vi 
cent Sales Tax revenues may be used by DPW in 
future years for other capital, operating or 
maintenance expenditures. Since the proposed $4 
million Embarcadero Roadway right-of-way sale 
proceeds revenues, which are the source of the 
proposed supplemental appropriation, are limited by 
the terms of SB 181 to be used exclusively for 
construction of local streets and related amenities 
(such as Rincon Park, which is located within the 
geographical boundaries of the Mid-Embarcadero 
Roadway Project) which provide an alternative to the 
Embarcadero Freeway, the approval of the proposed 
use of these funds for such purposes seems 
reasonable. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

63 



SEP 16 '9B 02:24PM 66 

Attachment 1 



Summary of $4,558,200 1/2 Cent Sales Tax Allocation 
for MTC Property Acquisition 



Funding 

Source Amount 



FHWA Reimbursed (Roadway Portion) $1 ,758,51 5 

Rincon Park Advance (to be reimbursed with 2,137,702 

this supplemental) 

1/2 Cent Sales Tax (Roadway Portion - no 
reimbursement required) 661,983 

$4,558,200 



Attachment 2 
rage 1 of 2 



Mid-Em ha rcadero Surface Street Improvements Funding Summary: 



Funding Source Amount 


Federal Emergency Relief 

State Flexible Congestion Relief 

Locai (This Supplemental Appropriation Request) 


$8,859,525 

1,480,299 

749,907 


Total Funding Sources 


$11,089,731 



|Vlid-Embarcadcro Surfare Street Improvement? rtiiri>et Summary: 



Phase 


Amount 


Right of Way 
Design 

Construction Contract 
Construction Contingency (u\ 10% 
Construction Management 


$625,000 
767.248 

7.75X.OOO 
775 r 800 

1.1 63.68.3 


TOTAL COST 


S 1 1 .0X9.73 1 



Attachment 2 
Page 2 of 2 



Detailed Budpet for Dcsipn Phase: 



DESIGN SECTION 


CLASSIFICATION: 


Hourly Rate 


Tot. Mrs 


No. of People 


Total Amount 


Streets and Highways: 


5202- Junior Civil Engn 
5204- Assl Civil Engr: 
5206- Assoc Civil Engr 
5366- Engineering Assoc II: 


$54.32 
61.05 
72.43 
61.67 


528 
528 
528 
528 


2 
3 


$57,367 
96.700 
38.245 
32.562 


l-andscape Architecture: 


5272- Asst landscape Arch: 
5274- 1 .andscapc Architect: 
5366- Engineering Assoc 11: 


7143 
83. X7 
61.67 


528 
528 
528 




38.245 
44.286 
32.562 


I lydraulics Section: 


5204- Assl Civil Engr 
5366- Engineering Assoc 11: 


6 1 .05 
61.67 


528 
528 




32.233 
32.562 


Mechanical Section: 


5254- Assoc Meeh Engr: 
5366- l-jigiiicering Assoc II: 


72.43 
61.67 


528 
528 




38.245 
32.562 


Kleclrical Section: 


5238- Assoc Electrical Engr: 
5366- Engineering Assoc 11: 


72.43 
61.67 


528 
52X 




38.245 
32.562 


Structural Section: 


5206- Assoc Civil Engr: 
5366- Engineering Assoc 11: 


72.43 
6 1 .67 


528 
52X 




38.245 
32.562 


Site Assess / Remediation: 


1366- Special Assl VII: 


51.36 


528 




27.117 


Specifications: 


A9I9 - Contract Specialist II: 


88.65 


80 




7.092 


Project Management: 


5504 - I'rojeel Manager II: 


X9.9X 


528 




47.507 


Surveyors: 


5314 -Survey I'any Chief: 
5312 -Surveyor: 


65.06 
56.47 


528 
528 




34.352 
29.X 17 


City Attorney: 




104.59 


40 




4.IN4 




•■' TOTAL: 


i~ '--'- 


■H • 




$767,248 



Detailed Budpet for Construction Management Phase: 



SECTION 


CLASSIFICATION: 


Hourly Rate 


Tot. Mrs 


No. of People 


Total Amount 


Construction Management 


63 IX- Conslr. Inspector 


S6X.3 1 


1056 


4 


$2X8.535 




5210 - Si Civil I'.nvr 


97.07 


XXO 




X5.4I9 




5206- ASSOC Civil Engr 


72.43 


8X0 




63.741 




5366- Engineering Assoc II: 


61.67 


704 


1 


86.83 1 


Streets anil Highways: 


5208 -Civil Knur: 


X3.87 


X80 




73.X09 




5206 - Assoc. Civil Engr: 


72.43 


704 




50.993 




5204 - Assl Civil Knur: 


6 1 .05 


704 




42.97X 


1 .andscapc Architecture 


5272 - Assl landscape Arch: 


72.43 


704 




50.99;, 




5274 - Landscape Arch: 


83. X7 


704 




59.047 


1 lydraulics Section: 


5204 - Assl Civil l.nur: 


61.05 


700 


1 42.734 


Mechanical Section: 


5254 - Assoc Meclt Kngn 


72.4.'! 


704 




50.99.-, 


Electrical Sect ion: 


5366 - Engineering Assoc II: 


6 1 .67 


704 




43.416 




523X - Asm.c Electrical Kngn 


r 72.43 


704 




50.99;, 


Structural Section: 


5206- Assoc Civil l-jtgr 


72.4 3 


352 




25.496 


Site Assess/ Remediation: 


1366- Special Assl VII: 


51.36 


52X 




27.1 17 


Project Management 


5504 - I'rojeel Manager II: 


X9.9X 


1056 




95.015 


Survevors: 


53 14 - Survey Party Chief: 


65.06 


176 




11.451 




5312 - Surveyor 


56.47 


176 




9.939 


Ciiv Attorney: 




104.59 


40 




4.1X4 




TOTAL: 


% & ■* 




• ■ • - 


$1,163,683 



Note: Hourly rates include MFB @ 20 21%: Paid Time OH @ 22 73%; and Overhead @ 74 4% 



66 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 8 - File 98-1423 

Department: Airport Commission 

Item: Resolution approving a new lease between the U. S. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the City 
and County of San Francisco, acting by and through 
the Airport Commission, to authorize the FAA to 
install, operate, and maintain four Low Level 
Windshear Alert Svstems. 



Purpose of Lease: 



Lessor: 



This lease provides the FAA with approximately 1,600 
square feet of space for the installation, operation, and 
maintenance of four Low Level Windshear Alert 
Systems at locations at the Airport identified on the 
attached map as Site Nos. 1, 7, 9, and 10. The purpose 
of these systems is to assist in ensuring the safety of 
aircraft movements at San Francisco International 
Airport. 

Citv and Countv of San Francisco 



Lessee: 



Federal Aviation Administration 



Amount Payable by 

FAA To Airport: No charge to the FAA. In return, the FAA installs, 
operates, and maintains the four Low Level 
Windshear Alert Systems on Airport property at no 
cost to the Airport. 



Term of Lease: 



15 years and three months, from July 1, 1998 to 
September 30, 2013, renewable annually at the option 
of the FAA. 



Description: The proposed resolution would approve a new lease 

between the Airport and the FAA in order for the FAA 
to install, operate, and maintain Low Level Windshear 
Alert Systems at four new sites at the Airport. 
According to Mr. Martin Slater of the Airport, the 
installation of these four Low Level Windshear Alert 
Systems would increase to nine the total number of 
such sites in and around the Airport. Specifically, Site 
Nos. 2, 3, and 6 are located on Airport property; Site 
No. 4 is located in Burlingame; and Site No. 5 is 
located in Millbrae. The Airport has separate leases 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

67 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



with the FAA for the three Low Level Windshear Alert 
Systems located on Airport property. According to Ms. 
Gretchen Nicholson of the City Attorney's Office, the 
leases for the two existing Systems located off Airport 
property were not subject to approval by the Airport or 
the Board of Supervisors because the FAA negotiated 
the leases directly with the other jurisdictions. 
Similarly, according to Mr. Slater, a lease for a Low 
Level Windshear Alert System to be located at Site No. 
8, which is proposed for Burlingame but has not yet 
been installed, is not subject to approval by the Airport 
or the Board of Supervisors. 

According to Mr. Slater, the Low Level Windshear 
Alert Systems are used to detect the low level 
windshear, or "downdrafts," that can adversely affect 
airplane takeoffs and landings during storms. 
According to Mr. Slater, each Low Level Windshear 
Alert System is mounted on a pole, which is anchored 
in a 20' x 20', or 400 square foot, concrete pad. The 
four Low Level Windshear Alert Systems included in 
the proposed lease therefore occupy 1.600 square feet 
of Airport property. 

1. The Airport Commission approved a resolution on 
July 14, 1998 stating that the installation, operation, 
and maintenance of the Low Level Windshear Alert 
Systems are necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft 
movements at the Airport. Prior to development of 
these systems in the 1970s, according to Mr. Slater, 
there was no practical way of detecting downdrafts to 
provide advance warnings to FAA. control tower 
personnel and pilots. 

2. The proposed lease would be retroactive to July 1, 
1998, and therefore the proposed resolution should be 
amended to provide for retroactive authorization. 



Recommendation: 



Amend the proposed resolution to provide for 
retroactivity, and approve the proposed resolution as 
amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

68 



bt^-lV-iggB 10:52 FROM SFIft-BUS DEU £, NGMT 



TO 



914152520461 P. 02 

Attachment 




69 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 9 - File 98-1456 



Department: 
Item: 



Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 
Lessee: 
Number of Sq. Ft. 



Amount Payable 
to Airport: 



Term of Lease: 



Description: 



Airport Commission 

Resolution approving a new "North Terminal 
Concession Opportunity Lease" between Host 
International, Inc. (Host) and the City and County of 
San Francisco, acting by and through the Airport 
Commission. 

This new lease provides for Host's management of 
eight concession businesses in the Airport's North 
Terminal. 

City and County of San Francisco 

Host International, Inc. 

Approximately 5,804 square feet in six retail spaces 
operated by eight concessionaires. 



The proposed lease would require Host to pay the 
Airport the greater of a minimum annual guarantee of 
$1,200,000 for the first year of the lease term or a 
percentage of gross revenues realized by Host. 
According to the lease, the annual percentage of gross 
revenues is 12% for the first $1,000,000, 14% between 
1,000,001 and $1,500,000, and 16% for all gross 
revenues in excess of $1,500,000. The lease also 
provides for annual increases in the Minimum Annual 
Guarantee based on increases in the Department Store 
Inventory Price Index-Soft Goods 1 for the remaining 
four years of the lease term. 

Five years, estimated to begin on December 9, 1998, 
upon completion of the required renovation work by 
Host and to end on December 8, 2003. 

The proposed resolution would approve a new lease of 
the North Terminal Concessions at the San Francisco 



1 According to Ms. Judy Tabimina of the Airport, soft goods are defined as retail goods such 
as toys, sunglasses, and books. The Airport has determined that this price index is the most 
appropriate one to apply to leases for Airport concessions. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



70 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



International Airport, entitled "North Terminal 
Concession Opportunity 2 Lease" between Host and the 
City. Under the proposed lease, the eight concessions 
would occupy a total of 5,804 square feet. Host would 
directly operate four of the eight concessions totaling 
2,523 square feet, or approximately 43 percent of the 
total square footage. Host would also have two sub- 
lessees, including SunShade Holding Corporation 
(SunShade), a Minority-owned Business Enterprise 
(MBE), which would operate two concessions totaling 
587 square feet, and CalStar Retail, Inc. (CalStar, 
formerly Del Duca Enterprises, Inc., the prior lessee), 
a Women-owned Business Enterprise (WBE), which 
would operate two concessions totaling 2,694 square 
feet. The 3,281 square feet sub-leased by the MBE 
and WBE constitute approximately 57 percent of the 
total square footage 

The following table identifies the six retail spaces, the 
name of each concession business, the operator of each 
business, the types of goods sold by each business, and 
the square footage (SF) occupied by each business. 



Space 


Name 


Operator 


Goods Sold 


SF 


A 


Awesome Atom's 


CalStar 


Educational Toys 


1,692 


B 


SF News Exchange 


Host 


News. Retail Goods 


312 


C 


SF News Exchange 


Host 


News, Retail Goods 


311 


D 


Watch Zone 


SunShade 


Watches 


337 


E 


Sun Shade Optique 


SunShade 


Sunglasses 


250 


F 


Vroom-Toys that Travel 


CalStar 


Toys 


1,002 


F 


Wilson's 


Host 


Leather Goods 


898 


F 


Simply Books 


Host 


Books 


1.002 



Total 5.804 

Prior to commencement of the proposed lease. Host is 
required to invest a minimum of $150 per square foot 
to renovate the 5,804 square feet of space covered by 
the lease, or a minimum investment of S870.600. The 
space consists of 2,652 square feet included in the 
prior lease with CalStar 3 and 3,152 square feet to be 



2 According to Ms. Tabimina. the .Airport's concession leases typically include the word 
'Opportunity' to indicate the concessionaire's opportunity to conduct business at the Airport. 

3 Del Duca's lease was for a total of 3,201 square feet. According to Ms. Tabimina, 549 square 
feet included in that lease have been leased separately to another lessor. The remaining 
2,652 square feet are included in the proposed lease to Host. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

71 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

included for the first time in the proposed lease to 
Host. 4 According to Ms. Judy Tabimina of the Airport, 
Host began the renovation work on September 9, 1998. 
Attachment I provided by the Airport is a 
memorandum explaining why the Airport initiated 
this work prior to obtaining approval of the proposed 
lease by the Board of Supervisors. 

According to Mr. Bob Rhoades of the Airport, Host and 
its sub-lessees have proposed new retail "concepts" for 
the proposed lease. Therefore, according to Mr. 
Rhoades, the Airport has not forecast future revenues 
to the Airport based on the percentages of gross rent. 
As shown in Attachment II provided by Mr. Rhoades, 
the total estimated revenue of $6,121,206 to be paid by 
Host to the City over the five-year term of the lease is 
therefore based on the first-year Minimum Annual 
Guarantee of $1,200,000 and projected annual 
increases of an estimated 1.0 percent over this first- 
year figure for the five-year term of the proposed lease. 
According to Mr. Rhoades, the 1.0 percent figure 
approximates the annual increases in the Department 
Store Inventory Price Index-Soft Goods during the 
five-year term of the prior lease with Del Duca. The 
$6,121,206 estimated to be paid by Host is $272,517 
more than the $5,848,689 paid by Del Duca (now 
CalStar) over the past five years, as shown in 
Attachment II. 

Comments: 1. The Airport Commission adopted Resolution No. 98- 

0150 on June 23, 1998, recommending the award of 
the lease to the proposed lessee, Host International, 
Inc., based on a competitive bidding process. The 
award was based on the highest Minimum Annual 
Guarantee bid amount. According to Ms. Tabimina, 
the Minimum Annual Guarantee bid for the proposed 
lease was set at $800,000 per year based on a study 
commissioned by the Airport. The Minimum Annual 
Guarantee for the period from May 15, 1997 to May 
14, 1998, or the final year of the prior lease term with 
CalStar, was $1,178,640 (on a $98,220 monthly basis), 
or $21,360 less than the proposed Minimum Annual 



4 The 3,152 square feet were previously used for United Airlines' frequent flyer lounge, the 
IK Club, according to Ms. Tabimina. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

72 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Guarantee of $1,200,000. As shown in Attachment III 
provided by the Airport, two proposals for this lease 
were received by the Airport, one from Host and the 
other from Brookstone, Inc. As explained in 
Attachment III, the Airport found "that the 
Brookstone proposal was unacceptable." 

3. The prior lease with CalStar expired on May 14, 
1998. However, according to Ms. Tabimina, the 
Airport extended CalStar's lease through September 8, 
1998, for the same monthly Minimum Annual 
Guarantee payment of $98,220 required during the 
final year of CalStar's lease term. 

4. The proposed lease provides that Host will either (a) 
obtain a surety bond in an amount equal to one-half of 
the minimum annual guarantee payment of 
$1,200,000. or $600,000, which would be payable to 
the Airport in the event of non-payment of rent or non- 
monetary default under the terms of the proposed 
lease, or (b) deposit with the Airport an Irrevocable 
Letter of Credit. Certificate of Deposit, Certified 
Check. Money Order, or Cashier's Check equal to an 
amount of one-half of the minimum annual guarantee 
payment of $1,200,000, or $600,000, as security for 
faithful performance of the lease terms by Host. 

5. As noted above, according to Mr. Rhoades, Host 
began the renovation work required under the 
proposed lease on September 9, 1998. As previously 
noted. Attachment I provided by the Airport is a 
memorandum explaining why the Airport initiated 
this work prior to obtaining approval of the proposed 
lease by the Board of Supervisors. 



Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter 
for the Board of Supervisors since the Airport 
authorized Host to begin the renovation work under 
the proposed lease prior to obtaining approval of the 
lease by the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

73 



Airport 
Csoitituion 

City anil Comiy 
o>. San Francisco 

Willie L Brown. Jr. 
Mayor 

Henry E. Berman 
President 

Roland A. Quan 
V«x President 

Michael S StrunsKy 

Larry Mazzo la 

Linda S. Crayton 

JOHN L. MARTIN 
Airport Director 



Attachment I 
Page 1 of 2 




San Francisco International Airport 

CATiWAY TO TH£ PACIFIC 

VIA FACSIMILE 
(415) 252-0461 

September 17, 1998 



Mr. Nick Levinson 

Budget Analyst 

Board of Supervisors 

War Memorial Building 

401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

Subject: Host International, Inc. 

North Te rminal Concession Opportunity Lease 

Dear Nick: 

Host International, Inc. Was awarded the North Terminal Concession Opportunity 
Lease by Airport Commission Resolution No. 98-0150, adopted June 23, 1998. 

In cases such as this, due to the tight construction schedule and to ensure that 
facilities are operational in time for the holidays, we permit tenants to commence 
demolition before all of the requisite approvals are obtained which, in most cases, are 
routine. As a matter of practice, demolition always takes place as soon as the 
previous lease expires. 

As you requested, enclosed please find the following information that you requested 
from Ms. Judy Tabimina of the Concession Development and Management 
Department: 

• Copy of HRCs provisional approval. 

• The Minimum Annual Guarantee of $ 1 .2 million is the key figure in this 
case. Since new concepts are being tried, we have not forecasted future 
revenues that would be tied to the percentage rent. 

• In FY 97/98, CalStar Retail. Inc. grossed $7,21 5,1 78 in revenues. 

• Copy of the Consumer Price Index. 



SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT .P.O BOX 8097 • SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA 94128 ■ TELEPHONE (650) 794-6000 . FAX (650) 794-5005 
T0 - d T9t70SSSSTt7l6 01 74 J.WDU1 S A3Q Sna-bldS UOdd it>:60 866T-iI-d3S 



Attachment I 
Page 2 of 2 



Mr Nick Levinson 
Scpianba 17, 199S 
P«gc2 



Please fax your draft report (fax no. (650) 794-4005) for my review. Should you 
have further questions, please call me at (650) 794-5036. 



Sincerely 




\Bo)U(hoades 
Deputy Airport Director 
Business and Finance 
Enclosures 

cc: Judy Tabimina 



S0'd I9frecs2sifri6 oi 75 iwou s raa sne-bids woad 8* :60 866i-<LT-d3S 



SEP- 18- 1938 09=51 FROM 



SFIA-BUS DhU & nun i 



Attachment II 
Page 1 of 2 




AIRPORT COMMISSION 

Department of Concession Development and Management 



San Francisco International AirporK J 

'AVTOTH 



GATTWAV TO Ttt£ FACDTC 



Post Office Box 8097 

San Francisco International Airport 

San Francisco, CA 94128 

TELEPHONE: (650)794-4500 

FACSIMILE: (650)794-4519 



F 

A 
X 



To: 


Mr. Nick Levinson - City Budget Analyst Office 


From: 


Lorri A Vasquez - Asst Deputy Airport Director for Concession Development and 
Management Department 


Date: 


Friday, September 18, 1998 


Fax: 


(415) 252-0461 


Re: 


North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease 


# of Pages: 


2, including cover sheet 


□ Please □ Please Q For your D Please reply gj Per your 
review and handle information request 
comment 


You D will IS will not receive a hard copy. 



Comments: 

Mr. Levinson: 

Per your request, the following is the anticipated minimum annual guarantee (MAG) for 
the Airport from Host International, Inc., Lessee for the North Terminal Concession 
Opportunity Lease. The term of this Lease is five years. 



Year 


Anticipated MAG 


1 


$1,200,000 


2 


$1,212,000 


3 


$1,224,120 


4 


$1,236,361 


5 


$1,248,725 



TOTAL: $6,121,206 

Attached is the off-calendar memo sent to the Airport Commission regarding the 
outcome of the North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease RFQ/P process. 




76 



SEP-18-1998 09:51 FROM SFIA-BUS DEU 8. MGMT TO 

CS/18 '98 10:3S IC:KPRV=Y M. RCSE ?»: £15-252-0461 



914152520461 
MGE 



P. 02 
2 



Attachment II 
Page 2 of 2 




IfiJTA Pro?** v 1 **^ 
U/CHjjoUmoti-' 



UP}-0504 

575*1 (M* ^J« v^l^de* • Soft O^- 



! 1993 

i • 1994 
{ V993 

WW 



CA5 

Tn&ex 

M 

595 
595 

595 
595 
$95 



» 



DAB 



597.5 
101.1 

606-1 
606.< 



S : .d 






MAO 

3*E 



; 01 t6555 iuiw&H 



$9€,SW.50' 
S96.li9.9S 1 

sioc ' 



TOTAL: $5,848,689.05 



0*16/99 



W'd T9W5CS2STfT6 



01 iww 1 A3C sne-yids uo>u Bttil as£w,:-x£B 

TOTAL P. 02 
77 



SEP- 18- 1998 12:02 FROM SFIR-BUS DEU 8, NGMT 



Airport 
CommrttioB 

City and County 
0! San Francisco 

Willie L. Brown. Ji 
Mayo; 

Henry E. Berman 
President 

Roland A. Ciuan 
Vict President 

Micraei S. Strunsky 

Larry Mazzola 

Linda S. Craylon 

JOHN L MAfiTIN 
Airport Director 



TO 



914152520461 



P. 02 




Attachment III 
Page 1 of 3 



San Francisco International Airport 



2s-=WAV T£ tv.-. »&ciF:r 



MEMORANDUM 



May 14, 1998 



TO AIRPORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Henry E. Berman, President 
Hon. Roland A. Quan, Vice President 
Hon. Michael S. Strunsky 
Hon. Larry Mazzola 
Hon. Linda S. Crayton 

FROM: Airport Director 

SUBJECT Approval of Proposal of Host International, Rejection of Proposal 
of Brookstone, and Authorization of Director to Negotiate 
Minimum Annual Guarantee for North Terminal Concession 
Opportunity Lease. 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: ADOPTION OF THE 
ACCOMPANYING RESOLUTION WHICH APPROVES PROPOSAL OF 
HOST INTERNATIONAL, REJECTS PROPOSAL OF BROOKSTONE, AND 
AUTHORIZES DIRECT OR TO NEGOTIATE MINIMUM ANNUAL 
GUARANTEE FOR NORTH TERMINAL CONCESSION OPPORTUNITY 
LEASE. 



Background 

By Airport Commission Resolution No. 98-0051, the Airport Commission 
authorized staff to issue a Request for Qualification/Proposal (RFQ/P) for the 
North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease. Host International and 
Brookstone submitted packages in response to the RFP/Q. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 



g 



SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT . P.O BOX 8M7 . SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA 94126 • TELEPHONE (6S0) 784-5OO0 • FAX (650) 794-5006 



78 



SEP-18-1998 12=03 FROM SFlfi-BUS DEU 2, MGMT TO 914152520461 P. 03 

Attachment III 



Page 2 of 3 



Members. Airport Commission 
May 14. 1998 
Page 2 



The goal of the RFQ/P was to ensure that prospective bidders were qualified and 
that their proposals were acceptable to the Airport The proposals were reviewed 
by a five-member panel using the following criteria. Airport experience - 10 
points, Tenant Mix - 70 points, Operations/Management Plan - 1 points, and 
Design Intent - 10 points The Tenant Mix, the largest component of the score, 
addressed the proposed concept and theme, utilization of national, regional and 
local brand name companies, and the utilization of Disadvantaged Business 
Enterprise ("DBE") set-asides 

The reviewing panel determined that the Host proposal was acceptable, Host had 
adequate Airport experience, and the tenant mix, operation/management plan, and 
design intent were acceptable In particular. Host's proposal stated that it would 
provide 57% of total square footage to DBE participation, which exceeds the 
Airport's requirement of 30% The Human Rights Commission (HRC) is 
currently reviewing Hosts Benefits Ordinance declarations and employee 
workforce plans to determine whether Host is in compliance with Chapter 12B of 
the Administrative Code Certification of Benefits Ordinance compliance had not 
been received as of this writing but is expected shortly 

The panel determined that the Brookstone proposal was unacceptable In 
particular, Brookstone' s proposal did not identify a subleasing plan 

The rejection of Brookstone' s proposal will result in only one eligible bidder. 
Host International, Inc. Under these rare circumstances, Airport staff has 
determined that a bid would not be in the best interests of the City Instead, to 
maximize the rent structure, Airport staff recommends that Director be authorized 
to negotiate the Minimum Annual Guarantee with Host, which Minimum Annual 
Guarantee shall not be less than the Minimum Annual Guarantee specified in the 
RFQ/P, $800,000 

Modifications to the Lease 

Per the original Lease specifications, the .Airport was to build, at its own cost, a 
common storefront framing on all of the stores Staff has determined that only 
two facilities (Space B and F) will incorporate the common storefront framing. 
Further, due to the security checkpoint relocation occurring in the North 
Terminal, Space E will be relocated to a comparable location on the other side of 
Space C (map attached). These modifications will be conveyed to Host 
International and will be reflected in the final Lease 



79 



SEP-18-1998 12=03 FROM SFIA-BUS DEU & MGMT TO 914152520461 P. 04 

. ' Attachment III 



Page 3 of 3 



Members. Airport C ommissi on 

May 14, 1998 

Pagc3 



Recommendation 



Based upon the evaluation by the panel, I recommend adoption of the attached 
Resolution approving Host's Proposal, rejecting Brookstone's Proposal, and 
authorizing the Director to negotiate the Minimum Annual Guarantee, which will 
not be less than $800,000, subject to Human Rights Commission's determination 
of Host's 12B Compliance. I will return to you for your approval of the 
negotiated Minimum Annual Guarantee and the award of the Lease. 




Johnl.. Martin 
Airport Director 

Prepared by: Bob Rhoades 

Attachments 



80 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 10 - File 98-1472 



Department: 



Item: 



Location: 
Seller: 

Size of Lot: 
Purchase Price: 

Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Department of Real Estate 
Police Department 

Resolution authorizing the purchase of real property at 
301 Eddy Street (Assessor's Block 338, Lot 23) for the San 
Francisco Police Department; and adopting findings 
under the California Environmental Quality Act and 
findings pursuant to City Planning Code Section 101.1. 

Assessor's Block No. 338, Lot No. 23, located at 301 Eddy 
Street 

301 Eddy Associates, LLC, a California limited liability 
company, and Maclean Properties, LLC, a Delaware 
limited liability company 

Approximately 13,750 square feet of land area 

$1,317,000 plus an estimated $19,000 in closing costs, for 
a total cost of $1,336,000 

Previously appropriated funds included in the Police 
Department's FY 1998-99 budget 

Approval of the proposed resolution would authorize the 
acquisition of the subject property, Block No. 338, Lot No. 
23, from 301 Eddy Associates, LLC, a California limited 
liability company, and Maclean Properties, LLC, a 
Delaware limited liability company, as Seller, for 
$1,317,000, plus an estimated $19,000 in standard closing 
costs, to renovate the property for use as a sub-station for 
the Tenderloin Task Force (TTF). According to Captain 
Alex Fagan of the Police Department, the TTF is the 
Police Department's response to the high level of crime in 
the Tenderloin. The TTF currently consists of 86 
uniformed personnel of the Police Department, who 
provide community policing services to residents of the 
Tenderloin. 

The subject property, consisting of land and a one-story 
commercial building over ramped basement space, is 
located in the Tenderloin neighborhood on the southwest 
corner of Eddy Street and Jones Street, across from 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

81 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Boeddeker Park. The rectangular-shaped lot has 
dimensions of approximately 137.5' x 100', or a total of 
approximately 13,750 square feet. According to Officer 
Jeff Clark of the Police Department, the ground-floor 
portion of the building consists of approximately 13,500 
square feet, of which the TTF sub-station would occupy 
approximately 8,750 square feet of renovated space, while 
the remaining 4,750 square feet would not be renovated 
at this time but would be used for TTF storage space. The 
8,750 square feet of renovated office and related space for 
TTF personnel equals approximately 102 square feet for 
each of the 86 TTF employees. The ramped basement 
space, which will be used exclusively for emergency 
vehicle parking, also consists of approximately 13,500 
square feet, for a total of 27,000 square feet. 

Current tenants in the building include A-l Rent-A-Car 
and the Rescue Mission church. These tenants currently 
have month-to-month leases that would be assumed by 
the City upon acquisition of the property, according to Mr. 
Charlie Dunn of the Department of Real Estate (DRE). 
because the Seller was unwilling to deliver the property 
vacant. Furthermore, according to Mr. Dunn, because the 
existing tenants would have to vacate the building before 
the start of the renovation work, currently scheduled for 
April of 1999. State Relocation law would require the 
City, as the property owner, to provide these tenants with 
relocation benefits. According to Mr. Gary Hoy of the 
Department of Public Works (DPW). the relocation 
benefits are estimated to cost approximately $67,000, and 
are included in Attachment I. provided by Mr. Hoy. which 
contains a budget for the total estimated project cost of 
$4,277,000 to acquire and renovate the 301 Eddy Street 
building. These funds were approved in the Police 
Department's FY 1998-99 budget. 

At its August 26, 1998 meeting, the Police Commission 
approved a resolution to acquire the subject property in 
order to renovate the building for use as the TTF sub- 
station. This new facility would replace an existing 
leased facility, located at 1 Jones Street, which contains 
9,000 usable square feet (18,000 square feet in total) 1 , or 



1 The 1 Jones Street lease is for the 18,000 square foot basement of the former Hiberma Bank 
building. According to Mr. Dunn, onlv approximately half of the space, or 9.000 square feet, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

82 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

approximately 105 square feet for each of the 86 
uniformed members of the TTF. The existing lease costs 
are $4,625 per month under a month-to-month lease, or 
$0.26 per square foot per month ($55,500 annually). 
According to Mr. Dunn, the leased space has a number of 
deficiencies for use as the TTF sub-station, including non- 
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act 
(ADA), non-compliance with seismic safety requirements, 
inadequate parking for emergency vehicles, and 
inadequate interview and holding areas. 

According to Mr. Dunn, the City researched other 
facilities available for lease in the Tenderloin to serve as a 
TTF sub-station, but chose the subject property because of 
its physical attributes and location. Attachment II 
provided by Mr. Dunn explains why the City has proposed 
to purchase the property rather than lease the property. 

The Department of City Planning (DCP) has found that 
the proposed acquisition of the subject property is in 
conformity with the City's General Plan and consistent 
with the eight Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 
101.1. DCP has also found that the proposed acquisition 
and projected use of the subject property are exempt from 
Environmental Review under Class I of the California 
Environmental Quality Act. 

Comments: 1. As previously noted, as part of the Board of 

Supervisors' approval of the Police Department's FY 1998- 
99 budget, $4,277,000 was budgeted to pay for the 
relocation of the TTF headquarters to the 301 Eddy Street 
property, including the subject $1,317,000 acquisition 
price and the design and renovation costs. 

According to Mr. Hoy, the $4,277,000 does not include the 
costs to move the TTF from its existing facility to the new 
sub-station or to install furniture, fixtures, and 
equipment, including telecommunications and computers, 
in the new sub-station. According to Mr. David Esparza 
of the Mayor's Budget Office, the estimated $300,000 
required for moving and related costs will be requested in 
the Police Department's FY 1999-2000 budget. 



is usable by the Police Department due to the presence of bank vaults and other physical 
obstacles. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

83 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

2. According to Mr. Dunn, the Police Department expects 
to continue to occupy the existing leased space at 1 Jones 
Street until the new TTF sub-station is completed and 
ready for occupancy, which, according to Mr. Hoy of DPW, 
is estimated to occur in April of 2000. 

3. Mr. Dunn states that the DRE has determined that the 
acquisition price of $1,317,000 represents the fair market 
value for the 301 Eddy Street property. This price equals 
approximately $49 per square foot based on the building 
area of 27,000 square feet. The owner of the property has 
agreed to this price and has entered into an Agreement of 
Purchase and Sale with the City, which is scheduled to 
close on or before 30 days after Board of Supervisors 
approval of the transaction. Mr. Dunn estimates that the 
total costs to purchase the property, including an 
estimated $19,000 in closing costs, will be $1,336,000. 

4. According to Mr. Hoy, the building at 301 Eddy Street 
would consist of 13,500 square feet of ground-floor space, 
including 8,750 square feet of renovated office and related 
space for TTF personnel and 4,750 square feet of 
unimproved storage space. The 13,500 square feet is 4,500 
square feet, or 50 percent, more than the 9,000 usable 
square feet contained in the existing leased facility. This 
additional square footage is required, according to Mr. 
Hoy, to enable the new TTF sub-station to comply with 
ADA and seismic code requirements, and to provide 
adequate interview, holding and detention, and storage 
areas. Furthermore, the 301 Eddy Street building would 
also include a 13,500 ramped basement space for parking. 

5. According to Mr. Hoy, the City expects to initiate an 
Invitation to Bid process for the award of a construction 
contract to renovate the existing building in January of 
1999. Construction is projected to begin in April of 1999, 
and to be completed in April of 2000. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution, based on the prior policy 

decision of the Board of Supervisors to approve funds in 
the Police Department's FY 1998-99 budget to acquire a 
new sub-station for the Tenderloin Task Force. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

84 



682 P01 



SEP 16 '98 



Attachment I nase 1 of 2 



Clly end County Of San FrenciBco 




%)F 



Willi* Lewis Brown, Jr., Mayoi 
Mark A. prlmeau, AIA, Director and Cny Architsct 



1415)557-4700 
FAX (41 5) 567-4701 

nt'.?'.//www.«iflpw.oom 

Department o1 Public Works 

Bureau of Aronlieeture 

30 Van Ness Avenue Suite 4100 

San Francisco, CA 94102-6020 

Tara 0. Lament, AIA, Bureau Manager 



Tenderloin Police Substation 
PROPOSED BUDGET MENU 



ROPOSED BUDGET 



^installation (see P a § e 2 for details) 



4,277,000 



% Const. 



1 CONSTRUCTION, PURCHASE. & INSTALLATION »—~ f-e- - - — "^-""V. .A^ygjJ. A 00 ' * 

Includes site purchase; construction contract, construction contingency, an enrichment (2% ol construction); I hazardous^wrtertrtsebatement, 
relocation ol existing tenants (thru SFRED), temporary relocation and moving costs of SFP0 are not included. 

2. CLIENT DEPARTMENT SERVICES ° °' 0$i 

C-lieni Department management costs (associated costs lor community outreach and commission meetings), temporary operating costs during 
construction, and Owner's Scope Contingency 



3. DPW PROJECT MANAGEMENT 



40,000 



1.1% 



Manegemsm of the project Bcope. schedule and Cudgel from initiation to post-construction; monitoring of project funds, revenue and expenditures; 
management ot design and construction contracts; appropriations assistance; »nd reporting to Client, Board and Mayor. 



4. ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES " 2,600 0.1% 

Developing project scope, scneduie and budget for initial appropriation, assistance with site selection/analysis; environmental reviews; coordination 
wrth Federal, State and Local Agencies lor processing and approvals; assistance with granl funding applications/invoices/payments; coordination 
and compliance with HFtC; liaison with local building t/ads unions during construction. 

3. CtTY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 6,000 0.1% 

Financial and legal counsel lor bond sales, lease agreements and construction contract support. 

«. REGULATORY AQENCY APPROVALS 37,000 1.0% 

Building permit and planning lees, otner local agency lees including Public Works. Water Department, and Power (PGE through PUC) 

7 BASIC ARCHITECTURAL/ENGINEERING SERVICES 257,400 7.1% 

Standard architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical englneenng services lor design, construction documentation, and construction phase 
services. 

8. SUPPLEMENTAL A/E SERVICES 22,300 0.6% 

AddiUonal architectural and englneenng services Including site end utility assessments; existing conditions assessments and documentation; 
environmental reports and studies; landscape architecture, civil engineering; specialty consultants, interior design; detailed cost estimates; value 
engineering/peer reviews; and poet construction services. 

6. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 4 RELATED SERVICES 222,800 6.1% 

Includes basic CM services as well as: construction contract preparation; prevailing wage monitoring, inspection lor compliance with contract 
documents, materials testing and inspection; monitoring of HRC compliance (MBE/WBE goals); monitoring ol certified payroll and interviews ol 
workers; schedule reviews end confirmation ol proposal requests. 

10. OWNER FURNISHED DATA. 8URVEYS 52,000 1.4% 

Includes hazardous materials surveys and reports; existing materials testing lor structural mtegnty; site and topograph^; surveys lor design. 



11. TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 



The figures Il6ted above are budgetary assumptions for the purpose of appropriation. These Items represent typical project cost* based 
upon previous project experience and are included for discussion and consideration. They are predictions of expenditures by category, 
actual costs will be managed jointly by the Client Department and the Department of Public Works. Questions regarding this budget 
Should be directed to the Project Manager, DPW. 



_^a. 




Gary Hoy 

8 5 PflflUw Murmur (<<7.<lfi771 



Attachment I 
Page 2 of 2 



i H 



- E 



— c 
2 § 



» » o 

all 



o o 


o o 


o o 




oi r-. 


r— 1 VD 


</></> 


DC 


c • 


■H O 


co o 


O i-i 


f-l <u 


u es 



S<5 






Is f 



E = 



u> s « a 

1 -o ° - 

2 < „ - 

£ ° I I 

O B O O 

c | 2 • 

s g s i 

tr ~ * </■ 

» m 2 

1 I ™ S 
O 3 CE < 



_ — O 

" # c 
•E 9 



5 = ° 

1UUN 



I -5 & 

§12 



£ « e § • 

t - > ■ 

° i? m ; 

i i I % 3 



.'£* 

B E <-> 

£ o •> 
J ? 



s = 



— c 

£ 3 



c o -J 

"il 

o 2 £ 
° §2 

a - *■ 

c < OJ 



S o- -p 
S o ° 



B ■ C 

C j> o 

" Ju 



o o o o o 



"U r>." 



o o o o o o o 



§00000000000000000000 
BOSi 
o o o o 
' o" r» o" o" o" 



- & i>: 



OOOOOOOOi 



OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 



Nttoniini- 



O O O o 

§8 



•9 o o) 



09 






>% I 
















H 


i—i 


1-1 B p 


















E 


01 
















4J 


5 


we & < < 
















QJ 


u 


CO 


^E -c £ 9 
















T3 lW 1 


Oh 


°S5c< 


B 




- 










*"" 






1 «1 o 5 


a 




5 






E 


- 









u o - U 

c c !? 5 


c 

c 
c 




< 






& 


1 1 








O OIU 


U 












j _ = 


< 






c c c c 


e 




'■: 


> 




E 


< 






o o o o 






< 


E 






Hi 








u u u o 


5 


u 


u 


|- 













3 3 3 3 












g 




2 










































•8 


1 
> 
o 
£ 




5 C C C C 

.2 o o o o 
5 u o u u 


c 
c 
U 


a 

5 


c 
U 

E 

3 


E 
U 

c 

3 


E 


E 
O 

u 

« 

■c 
■ 


J w O 

g go 

O O £ «£ 

u u .S 5 

..;» 


3 

y 

K 


gooooo 

" o o o o^ 


a 

a 
Z 


| 

< 






s 


U 


C 

a 

U 1 


C 


v 


1 

3 
O 


M N * ' 


o 


ix|i 


o 










a 








V 





U 


< 




*J «- CN CO ^* 

.26660 





_c 


_ 


^ 


e 


= 


:BI: 


a 


o 




5 - - - - 


■- 


£ 


■- 


■^ 


< 


r 


















= 




| 


a 
3 








1 






3 

F 


3 

- 


> 


■ 


q 


= 




- 


F 




1 


ir 












— 
- 




■ 




u 


u 




3 




r. 


f 








3 

E 
- 






c 


















•" 


u 


DC 


u 




DD 
























4 








w 


w 


B 


■ 




r*. 



O o. 



Q C 
03 O 

Q U 



*— a> co 00 co 



86 



SEP-17-1998 14=27 



CCSF REAL ESTATE DEPT 



City and County of San Francisco 




415 552 9216 P. 02/02 

Real Estate Department 

Office of the 
Director of Property 

Attachment II 



MEMORANDUM 

September 17, 1998 



TO: 



Harvey Rose 
Budget Analyst 







irector of Prop 



SUBJECT: Tenderloin Task Force 
Purchase of 301 Eddy St. 
File 98-1492 



Pursuant to your request, the following briefly explains the City's decision to purchase the above 
referenced property instead of leasing: 

• The S. F. Police Department required substantial and highly specialized property 
improvements ($2,500,000 +/-). The cost of these improvements likely requires the 
owners to obtain a loan 

• None of the many banks or other lenders the property owner contacted would loan 
money on a lease to the City which included the City's (Charter required) standard 
annual appropriation of funds. 

• If the City were to supply these substantial improvement monies, it seems logical to 
also own the land and existing structure. 

• The needs of the area were judged to be long term by the Police Department. 

These are a few of the reasons that lead the CIAC and the Mayor's Budget Office to recommend 
that we pursue a purchase of the property. 



554-9850 
FAX 552-9216 



\\REAL_EST-01SVR\DATA\LJSEJlS\CDUN?J\WPU4W461^1rv>ilottiloc 

25 Van Nui Avanua, Suit* 400 



San Francisco, 94102 

TOTAL P. 02 



87 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 11 - File 98-1419 



Department: 



Item: 



Location: 



Purpose of Lease: 



San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH) 
Department of Real Estate (DRE) 

Resolution authorizing the expansion and extension of an 
existing lease of real property at San Francisco General 
Hospital with the University of California Regents. 

The entire north portion of Unit 5B and Rooms 5B4, 5B6, 
5B8 and 5B10 in the south portion of Unit 5B, located on 
the fifth floor of the SFGH "New" Hospital Building; and 
Rooms 304, 308, 309, 310, 320, 321, 322, and 360 on the 
third floor in Building 100 of SFGH. 

To extend the occupancy and increase the space to be 
occupied by the University of California (UC) at SFGH, for 
use by the UC General Clinical Research Center Core 
Laboratorv. 



Lessor: 

Lessee: 

No. ofSq. Ft. and 
Cost Per Month: 

Annual Cost: 

Percentage over 
Prior Lease: 



City and County of San Francisco 
UC Regents 



8,485 square feet at approximately $.91 per square foot per 
month, for a total of approximately $7,721 per month. 

$92,656 



The existing lease for the entire north portion of Unit 5B 
and Rooms 5B4, 5B6, 5B8 and 5B10 in the south portion ui 
Unit 5B, located on the fifth floor of the SFGH Hospital 
Building and Rooms 304, 308, 309, 310, 320, 321, 322, and 
360 on the third floor in Building 100 of SFGH provides 
approximately 7,634 square feet at approximately $.58 per 
square foot per month, or $4,428 per month ($53,133 
annually). The proposed lease amendment would result in 
an increase in space for UC of 851 square feet (11 percent), 
from 7,634 square feet to 8,485 square feet, and an increase 
in cost to UC for annual rent of $39,523 (74 percent), from 
$53,133 to $92,656 per year. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Utilities and Janitor 

Provided by Lessor: The City would continue to provide all utilities and 
janitorial services, whose costs would be paid by the lessee. 

Term of Lease: The existing ten-year lease presently expires on September 

30, 2002. If the proposed resolution is approved, the term 
of the expanded and extended lease would commence upon 
approval of the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor 
(approximately on September 30, 1998) and would expire 
on December 31, 2010. This would result in an extension 
in the term of the existing lease of approximately 8 years 
and 3 months. 

Right of Renewal: UC would have the option to extend the lease as amended 
for three additional five-year periods at the then prevailing 
market rate as determined by the DRE. 

Description: In 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution 

authorizing SFGH to lease the entire north portion of Unit 
5B and Rooms 5B4, 5B6, 5B8 and 5B10 in the south portion 
of Unit 5B, located on the fifth floor of the SFGH Hospital 
Building and Rooms 304, 308, 309. 310, 320, 321, 322, and 
360 on the third floor in Building 100 of SFGH to the 
University of California Regents (the "Regents"), for use by 
the UC General Clinical Research Center Core Laboratory. 
(File No. 65-93-4). 

Approval of the proposed resolution would authorize the 
Mayor and the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, on behalf 
of the City and County of San Francisco, to execute a First 
Amendment (the "Amendment") to that lease with the UC 
Regents for the addition of Rooms 101, 102, 316, 317, and 
318 of Building 100 (consisting of 1,015 square feet) and the 
deletion of Room 5B10 in the SFGH Hospital Building 
(consisting of 164 square feet) for a net increase of 851 
square feet. In addition, under the proposed resolution, the 
term of the initial lease would be extended by 
approximately eight years and three months through 
December 31, 2010. 

According to Mr. Mark Zuffo of the Department of Real 
Estate, the initial lease premises (consisting of 7,634 
square feet) would continue to be used by the UC General 
Clinical Research Center Core Laboratory. Mr. Zuffo 
explains that UC plans to construct a new laboratory in the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

89 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

proposed additional rooms and existing rooms of Building 
100, which will be used to perform studies on HIV and 
other diseases that affect the population served by SFGH. 
Mr. Zuffo reports that the estimated cost of this project is 
approximately $2,000,000 as determined by UC and will be 
borne by UC and the National Institutes of Health. 

Under the proposed resolution, the rental amount of $.91 
per square foot per month would be retroactive to October 
1, 1997 (see Comment No. 1). Mr. Zuffo advises that if the 
proposed resolution is approved, the City would collect 
$30,230 in back rent from UC by applying the increased 
rental rate of $.33 ($.91 proposed new rate less the $.58 
existing rate) to the original lease of 7,634 square feet 
through September 30, 1998, the estimated effective date of 
the subject proposed extended lease. 

Under the proposed legislation, of the $.91 rent paid, $.33 
would be credited to a Maintenance and Capital 
Improvement Account for SFGH. According to Mr. Zuffo, 
the City may use funds in this account for (1) repairs, (2) 
code compliance (3) capital improvements to SFGH 
facilities leased by UC to the extent the City determines 
that' such expenditures are necessary. According to the 
proposed legislation, such expenditures would be subject to 
appropriation approval by the Board of Supervisors. 

Comment: 1. According to Mr. Zuffo, the existing lease contains a 

provision which allows the City to adjust the rental amount 
every five years to the prevailing market rate as 
determined by the DRE. Mr. Zuffo reports that due to the 
City's ongoing negotiations with UC over the term of the 
existing lease, the existing rental rate of $.58 per square 
foot per month was not adjusted on October 1, 1997, the 
scheduled date of such authorized adjustment. According 
to Mr. Zuffo, if the proposed resolution is approved, the 
proposed rental rate of $.91 per square foot per month, 
retroactive to October 1. 1997, represents the fair market 
value rate for the SFGH space to be leased to UC. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

90 



1* 

Harvev M 



Memo to Finance Committee 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 

larvey M. Rose 

cc: Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

91 



Memo to Finance Committee Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 

September 23, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting Attn: Susan Horn, Dept. 41 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SEP 2 4 1998 

Controller SAN pp-ANCiSCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Item 2 - File 98-1541 






Department: 
Item: 



REVISED 9/22/98 



Resolution establishing tax rate pass through amount for 
residential tenants pursuant to Chapter 37 of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code. 



Description: In May, 1998, the Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance 

amending Chapter 37 of the San Francisco Administrative 
Code, Sections 37.2, 37.3 and 37.8, to permit landlords to 
passthrough to residential tenants an amount based on any 
increase in Property Taxes imposed as a result of the 
repayment of General Obligation Bonds approved by the voters 
between November of 1996 and November of 1998. 

This proposed resolution would establish a tax rate of $0,010 
(or one cent per hundred dollars of assessed valuation) 
attributable to General Obligation Bonds approved between 
November 1, 1996 and November 30, 1998 and repayable 
during FY 1998-99. The $0,010 tax rate is part of the 
recommended tax rate of $1,165 for Fiscal Year 1998-99 which 
is pending final passage by the Board of Supervisors (Files 98- 
1404, 98-1405 and 98-1406). 

The attachment to this report, prepared by the Controller 
illustrates the impact of the pass through tax rate on several 
examples of rental properties within the City. These 
calculations are based on: a) authorized General Obligation 
bonded indebtedness of $288,000,000 as approved by the voters 
between November of 1996 and the present; b) $153,480,000 in 
debt either issued to date or to be issued during FY 1998-99; 
and, c) an annual debt service requirement of $6,057,947 
during FY 1998-99. The attachment contains examples 
showing that rent of tenants would increase by a range of 
$1.97 per unit per year or $0.16 per unit per month (for a six 
unit property located at 814 14 th Street) to $27.90 per unit per 
year or $2.33 per unit per month (for a three unit property 
located at 1723 Noe Street). As noted in the Controller's 
attachment, these examples are for illustration purposes only 
and the impact may vary if different assumptions are used. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



22 



UJ ■ _ 

>< ^ o 






« -Q 
— O 

c — 



in CM 00 CO CM 

in *-_ en f-_ m 

n v n co n 

i o co en in co 



I °°. * 



o o o o o 

k o o o o o 

; o_ o_ o o o 

O o" m" o" in" 

o o oo •- co 

; oon s n 






O O -Q O -Q 

i O* CD © d © 



B _ « 

« 5 ■ § 
cm t 



9 u 2 c 



•v. • 



o t * 5 "~ 

>. i >. ; • 

sells 

0. 



5 8 ^ I Si 





or, 


CO 


in 


in 


^ 


r\i 


""J 


on 






rt 




■ 


-r 


-r 








o 


N 


o 


o 


o 




O 


Q 



Attachment 



rCMOr^'CCMCOOCO 



CM — — 



«»V»V>V»*<>V»«»<«9 



co co cd r- ™ «; 



mo - o t 
en r^ co o o 



oooooooo 
oooqopqo 
o'ooo'oo'od 



68, 






SB 



m < 

co en 

o> en 

en en 



Hiss 

co O u 



— CO— CO — JO"" "~ 



I 

J 



B co" m" 



cm co — co in co 



— in cm co co in o 

lO S S N CO O) Cl 

h~ CO_ CM 00_ CO_ TT l>~ 

en" — " co" id" co" 



US 2 
c w 

t ' -5 .S! 



en m in J 
01 o o o 
— ~ — t- 



"1 « S » 



[I ffl 

i-o u 

O v:-0 u. 

oS O O 



en S 9 

"' o> en 

' .® 5 

m O O 

I o o 

o °c5 o3 

.« o o 

o o 



ore 
o o o 
ni co en 
r^ r— r»- 



- en en en en o> 
r en en en en en 




S 



CM 



M 



o en o o r~ 

_ Q CO Q 

J tt o_ o_ o_ CO_ o 

§ 5 ^ K cm oo — n S) q 5 iq 



o> -q 
en © 
en en 



CM 



-3 



IS 

it 

a. -a 

"O « Cs T3 

Q. "C T" c 

= * O 2 



*• • Ss 9 






o S S 5 

o "Q -S u 

e m in t 

ca v, ca O 

> « t " 

•" ■ ■ 2> 

C Ol Ol i 

.- o c -. 

°~ f ! 

ca CO CO Cj 

e o> en c 

; a a t: 

2 — — c 

o 2 2 s 



23 



Q. ^jo 



o S 
^2l 



S | 5 2 I 

>-5 -I CD — 
o — 



jlto s •■ CM"*rcoco 
^cn'-coio — ^ — 



0.2^ 
/ 

■ X 



BOARD of SUPERVISORS 




401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308 

San Francisco 94102-4532 

554-5184 



rrs dept- 



D0CUMEN1 

JNTOTICE OF CANCELLED MEETING SEP 2 5 1998 

5 FINANCE COMMITTEE SAN Fg {J^Sfrt 

SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the regularly scheduled Finance 
Committee meeting of September 30, 1998, has beenj5ancellec£)The next 
regularly scheduled Finance Committee meeting will be held on Wednesday, 
October 7, 1998, at 1:00 p.m., 401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 410, San Francisco, 
California. 



(^AMu^S 



Gloria L. Young 
Clerk of the Board 




POSTED: 9/24/98 



AGENDA 



--=# .. \ 



i 

2. 



Finance Committee 

Board of Supervisors 

City and County of San Francisco 



OCT 5 1998^ 



REGULAR MEETING 



WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1998 - 1:00 P.M. VETERANS BUILDING 

401 VAN NESS AVE, RM. 410 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA. 94102 

MEMBERS: Supervisors Mabel Teng, Barbara Kaufman, Gavin Newsom 
CLERK: Joni Blanchard 



Disability Access 



&. 



R 



m 



Both the Committee Room (Room 410) and the Chamber (Room 404) are wheelchair 
accessible. The closest accessible BART Station is Civic Center, four blocks from the 
Veterans Building. Accessible MUNI lines serving this location are: #42 Downtown Loop 
and the #7 1 Haight/Noriega and the F line to Market and Van Ness and the METRO 
stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI 
accessible services, call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of the Veterans Building adjacent to Davies Hall 
and the War Memorial Complex. 

Assistive listening devices are available for use in the Meeting Room and the Board 
Chamber. A device can be borrowed prior to or during a meeting. Bonower identification is 
required and must be held by Room 308 staff. 



The following services are available on request 48 hours prior to the meeting or hearing: 

♦ For American sign language interpreters or the use of a reader during a meeting, contact 
Violeta Mosuela at (415) 554-7704. 

♦ For a large print copy of an agenda, contact Moe Vazquez at (415) 554-4909. 

In order to assist the City's efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, 
multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other 
attendees may be sensitive to various chemical based products. Please help the City to accommodate 
these individuals. 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, 
boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. The 
Sunshine Ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations 
are open to the people's review. For more information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance 
(Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code) or to repon a violation of the ordinance, 
contact the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force at 554-4851. 



CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All items listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are 
considered routine by Committee and will be acted upon by a 
single, roll-call vote. There will be no separate discussion 
of items unless a member of the Committee or public requests, 
in which event the matter shall be removed and considered as a 
separate item. 

a. File 98-1602 . [Emergency Repair, Central Avenue Sewer] 
Resolution approving expenditure of funds for the Central 
Avenue Emergency Sewer Replacement under Clean Water 
Program Contract No. CW-181 - $164,355.00. (PUC) 

b. File 98-1603 . [Emergency Repair, 425 Noriega Street 
Sewer] Resolution approving expenditure of funds for 
emergency work to repair the structurally inadequate 
easement sewer parallel to the residence of 425 Noriega 
Street near 11th Avenue - $110,276.00. (PUC) 

c. File 98-1604 . [Emergency Repair, York Street Sewer] 
Resolution approving expenditure of funds for emergency 
work to repair structurally inadequate sewer in York 
Street from Precita Avenue to Peralta Avenue - 
$136,725.00. (PUC) 

ACTION: 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 98-1456 . [Airport Concession Lease] Resolution approving 
the "North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease" between Host 
International, Inc. and the City & County of San Francisco, 
acting by and through its Airport Commission. (Airport) 
(Consideration continued from 9/23/98) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1503 . [Campaign Consultant Fees] Ordinance amending 
Administrative Code Section 16.543(c) to add a fee schedule for 
campaign consultants and to require the Ethics Commission to 
evaluate the schedule in 1999 and propose any amendments to the 
schedule to the Board of Supervisors for approval by December 
1, 1999. (Ethics Commission) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1600 . [Moscone Center Garage Project] Resolution 
approving the issuance of Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds (not to 
exceed $8,250,000) of the Parking Authority of the City & 
County of San Francisco; approving execution and delivery of a 
project lease between the Authority, as lessor, and the City, 
as lessee (including certain indemnification provisions) ; 
approving a continuing disclosure certificate relating to 
Bonds; approving the form and circulation of an official 
statement relating to Bonds; authorizing payment of certain 
costs of issuance from proceeds of Bonds; ratifying previous 
actions taken in connection with the foregoing matters; and 
authorizing the taking of appropriate actions in connection 
therewith. (Mayor's Office of Finance and Legislative Affairs) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1560 . [Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds] Resolution 
authorizing the issuance and delivery of Multifamily Housing 
Revenue Bonds, Series 1998A (The "Series 1998A Bonds") and 
Series 1998B (The "Series 1998B Bonds," and together with the 
Series 1998A Bonds, the "Bonds") in an aggregate principal 
amount not to exceed $2,500,000 for the purpose of refunding 
bonds previously issued to provide financing for a multifamily 
rental housing project; authorizing sale of bonds; approving 
form of and authorizing execution of an indenture providing the 
terms and conditions of bonds; approving form of and 
authorizing execution of the bond placement agreement providing 
terms and conditions for sale of bonds; approving form of and 
authorizing execution of an amendment to financing and 
regulatory agreement; approving form of and authorizing 
execution of a loan agreement; approving form of and 
authorizing preparation and distribution of a preliminary 
official statement and the preparation, execution and 
distribution of an official statement relating to bonds; 
approving form of and authorizing the execution of a 
subordination agreement; approving and authorizing execution 
and delivery of any document necessary to implement this 
resolution; ratifying and approving any action heretofore taken 
in connection with the bonds, the project and the refunding of 
the prior bonds; and related matters. (Supervisor Medina) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1442 . [Price Adjustment, Local Sale/Business Tax 
Revenues] Ordinance amending Administrative Code by adding 
Chapter 21C, Sections 21C.1 through 21C.4, to reguire 
adjustment of priced offers for the purpose of evaluating price 
contracts for the purchase of commodities to reflect sales tax 
and gross receipts tax revenues produced by the procurement for 
the City, the S.F. Unified School District, the S.F. Community 
College District and the San Francisco Transportation 
Authority. (Supervisors Kaufman, Yee, Leno, Katz, Brown, Teng, 
Medina, Yaki, Newsom, Ammiano) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1557 . [County Clerk and Assessor-Recorder Fees] 
Ordinance amending Administrative Code by repealing Section 
8.33 which sets certain fees for the office of the County 
Clerk-Recorder and by adding Sections 8.3 3.1 and 8.33.2, 
setting certain fees for the Office of the County Clerk and 
setting certain fees for the Office of the County 
Assessor-Recorder. (Supervisor Kaufman) 

ACTION: 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 

Rule 5.40 provides that when legislation is introduced which would 
create or revise major city policy, the committee to which it is 
assigned shall not consider the legislation until at least 30 days 
after the date of introduction. 

File 98-1508 . [Living Wage Task Force] Resolution establishing 
an advisory task force to evaluate the impact of living wage 
proposals on San Francisco's economy, businessess, non-profit 
organizations and residents and setting forth the membership and 
duties of the task force (Living Wate Task Force) . (Supervisor 
Kaufman), 30 Day Rule expires 10/14/98. 

Watch future calendars for matters. 



Finance Committee 
S.F. Board of Supervisors 
401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308 
San Francisco, CA 94102 

IMPORTANT HEARING NOTICE!!! 



7 



Public Library,Gov't Info. Ctr., 5 th FIi 
Attn: Susan Horn 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 

/ 



30ARD OF SUPERVISORS 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

OCT 6 1998 

oi 1RL1C UBhAHY 



BUDGET ANALYST 



PUBLIC 



1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



October 2, 1998 
TO: ^Finance Committee 

FROM: ^Budget Analyst /?e^~~*-<^o.^ -&- «-m*.--^ •*. 
SUBJECT: October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item la- File 98-1602 
Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $164,355 for emergency replacement of the 
structurally inadequate sewer in Central Avenue between 
Golden Gate Avenue and McAllister Street. 

$164,355 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on March 
26, 1998, the sewer located in Central Avenue between 
Golden Gate Avenue and McAllister Street failed, and 
immediate repairs were required in order to protect the 
health, welfare, and property of the citizens of San 
Francisco. The PUC declared an emergency on March 27, 
1998. In accordance with Section 6.30 of the 
Administrative Code, the PUC initiated expedited 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Budget: 



Comments: 



contract procedures, and awarded a contract to J.M.B. 
Construction, Inc. (J.M.B.) in the amount of $118,640. 

The total estimated project cost is $164,355, including 
$136,205 in actual construction costs (or $17,565 more 
than the bid amount; see Comment No. 2) and $28,150 for 
DPW engineering and construction management costs. 
Attachment I details the DPW engineering and 
construction management costs. 

1. Mr. P. T. Law of the DPW advises that J.M.B. 
submitted the second lowest bid for the emergency repair 
work. J.M.B. was selected to do the work, rather than 
Willie Electric Co., Inc., the low bidder, because Willie 
Electric did not provide adequate security bonds to ensure 
completion of the work, according to Mr. Law. The table 
below lists the bidders and the amounts bid: 



Bidder 



Bid Amount 



Willie Electric Co., Inc. $100,700 

J.M.B. Construction, Inc. $118,640 

Marinship Construction Services Inc. $200,115 

2. According to Mr. Law, DPWs Bureau of Construction 
Management identified the need for additional sewer 
repair and street reconstruction work subsequent to the 
contract award. Attachment II is a Change Order form 
showing the additional cost of $17,565, which increased 
the final contract cost to $136,205 from the bid amount of 
$118,640. 

3. Mr. Law reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on April 16, 1998 and was completed on May 
7, 1998. 

4. Mr. Law advises that due to various delays in receiving 
expenditure documentation from the Contractor, the PUC 
is requesting approval of this proposed resolution 
approximately five months after the construction work 
was completed. 



Recommendation: 



Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
2 



Attachment I 



Cost Breakdown for ( J.O. #1598N, Contract #CW-181) 
Central Ave. Emergency Sewer Replacement 



Bureau of Engineering 



Classification 


Title 




late 


Hours 




Cost 


5504 


Project Manager II 


$ 


92 


8 


$ 


738 


5206 


Associate Civil Engineer 


$ 


75 


34 


S 


2,550 


5202 


Junior Civil Engineer 


$ 


50 


84 


$ 


4,200 


5366 


Civil Engineering Associate II 


S 


60 


100 


s 


6,000 


5381 


Engineering Student Trainee II 


$ 


33 


26 


$ 


858 


1426 


Secretary 


s 


43 


42 


$ 


1.BC6 



Bureau of Construction Management 



16,150 



Classification 


Title 


Rate 


Hours 




C03t 


5210 


Senior Civil Engineer 


$ 1C0 


. 6 


S 


600 


5208 


Civil Engineer 


$ 80 


11 


s 


880 


5204 


Assistant CMI Engineer 


$ . 59 


98 


5 


5,782 


531 B 


Construction Inspector 


$ 74 


64 


S 


4.736 



S 11,998 

Rounded: $ 12,000 



ewrr- • ni. r 



/Y & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
JEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 
Bureau of Construction Management 



Attachment II 

tilcrt. I Of | 



CHANGE ORDER 



Project: 

Central Avenue Emergency Sewer Replacement 



Grant No: 



Change Order No: »1 

cw i e i 



Date: July 2, 1998 



Controller No:ENWP9800ao:5 



SPEC Nor* 1S98N 



To: J. M. B. Conjtroction Inc. 
5 Murray Street 5100 
San Francisco. CA 941 12 



Subject: Miscellaneous Changes 



The Contractor is hereby directed to provide all labor, materials, equipment and supplies to complete the following work in 
conformance with applicable contract specifications: 



1) Remove sand from server between McAllister & Fulton -Lump Sum 

2) Investigate and perform emergency side jewer repair - Lump Sum 

3) Extra concrete base with 2" AC - 1.620 sfx$6.00 



-S 6,000.00 
-S 1,843.00 
-S 9,720.00 

517,565.00 



The CosKrav;:.* t?4 ir.-; Ci - .; isfawwlct^s :*-..:: :his agreement constituta full accord and satisfaction of all cost including 
jfearctiu*, !:'5t prc:hict:vely, escalation, del v , extended overhead and administration costs and extended performance time. 



The contract price is hereby ■, _f -tti in J.e Lump Sum addi:\e uaejo: of S)7,563.00. 



Item, 
CC. = 1 



Description Quantity Unit 

Miscellaneous Changes 1 L.S. 



Unit Prici 

N'A 



Tcral Amour.t 
S17.565.0C 



Estimated Cost: 



Decrease S 



Increase SI 7,565.00 



By Reason Of This Change Order. Contract Time Will Be Adjusted Calendar Days 



O'5tribuiion Pt^ns 



Change Request By:_ 



Hoc. Lim 



Date: 



?-2-98 




Coroir. Management fi) 
Cortjtr. Contracts 
ScrwJDPrj & CotltcI 
Project £n»"mceT 
Project Mlpajrr 



Pile: -7/^/9 £ 
Dale: J ^ * Jfj 
Date: ->/ g/f T 



Cost Verified By:. 
Recommended By 
Recommended By 
Recommended B> 
Accepted By 
Approved By: 



Notice to Contractors: You may proceed with Ui« work specified herein »i>en I lj for JlO.OOOor less and has been approved fbrtheCCSF by the 
aj pr uy i u ie authority andsisxd by the Coraracxr. Payment will be authorized by the Controller C.\word«OVl405N. , CC/CO!.doe 




ClPO' 



I s **—, 



Date:SkK* 



PUC General Manager/Designee 



^O 0CZTJN 



T9W3 ZSZ Sit. « SDnnb«lAH 3D8 r-lHTMc; 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lb- File 98-1603 
Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $110,276 for emergency work to replace the 
structurally inadequate easement sewer parallel to the 
residence at 425 Noriega Street near 11 th Avenue. 

$110,276 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on January 
20, 1998 the easement 1 sewer parallel to the residence at 
425 Noriega Street near 11 th Avenue failed, and 
immediate repairs were required in order to protect the 
health, welfare, and property of the citizens of San 
Francisco. The PUC declared an emergency on January 
22, 1998. In accordance with Section 6.30 of the 
Administrative Code, the PUC initiated expedited 
contract procedures and awarded an emergency time-and- 
materials 2 contract to Shimmick Construction Co., Inc. 
As shown in Attachment I provided by the PUC, the 
initial $100,000 estimate of construction costs was 
subsequently revised to $70,000. 

The total estimated project cost is $110,276, including 
$40,276 in actual construction costs as shown in 
Attachment II. The $40,276 construction amount is 
$29,724 less than the PUC's revised cost estimate of 
$70,000 noted above. The total estimated project cost also 
includes $30,000 for DPW engineering and construction 
management costs, $20,000 for a geotechnical consultant 
to DPW's engineering staff, and a $20,000 contingency for 
potential claims that, according to Ms. Christine Tang of 
the DPW, might be filed against the City by the owner of 
425 Noriega Street and/or the owners of neighboring 



1 According to Ms. Christine Tang of the DPW, an easement sewer is a sewer located on the public 
right-of-way within private property. 

2 Time-and-materials contracts establish a contract price based on the actual time a Contractor 
requires to complete the work and the actual cost of materials used in the work, rather than a 
specific bid price agreed upon prior to the start of the work. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
5 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comment: 



properties. Attachment I provided by the PUC also 
details the DPW engineering and construction 
management costs, the consultant costs, and the 
contingency for potential claims. 

1. Attachment III, provided by Ms. Tang, describes the 
process by which the PUC awarded the time-and- 
materials contract to complete the subject sewer 
replacement work to Shimmick Construction Co., Inc. 
without a competitive bid process. 

2. Ms. Tang advises that the final payment to the 
Contractor was $40,276, or $29,724 less than the cost 
estimate of $70,000, to adjust for the actual cost of 
construction. 

3. Ms. Tang reports that no claims have been filed against 
the City to date by the owner of 425 Noriega Street or the 
owners of neighboring properties. However, the $20,000 
contingency has been provided for in the total estimated 
project cost of $110,276 because claims might still be filed 
by the owner of 425 Noriega Street and/or the owners of 
neighboring properties, according to Ms. Tang. 

4. Ms. Tang reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on January 22, 1998 and was completed on 
February 4, 1998. 

5. Ms. Tang advises that due to various delays in 
receiving expenditure documentation from the Contractor, 
the PUC is requesting approval of this proposed 
resolution approximately eight months after the 
construction work was completed. 



Recommendation: 



Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
6 



PUBLIC UnLITlES COMMISSION £^ jfc fl£^> 

CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET INITIATION/REALLOCATION 



FR: 
RE: 



PUC FINANCE 

ATTN: CARLOS JACOBO 

Norman Chan 



DATE: 



2/19/98 



Q NEW PROJECT BUDGET SETUP 
fTJ PROJECT BUDGET REALLOCATION 



Type C UH); EN 

Title: 425 Noriega Street Emertency 


Project: R&R Phase: 
Sorer Replacement 


R954 




Job Order No. 
Program: 
Depc. Rep.: 

Existing 'hzftt 


1582N (CW-156-) 






Project Manager. Norman Chan 








Index 








Deot/Div 
Water/ 


Fund 

Type 


fynd 


Sub 

Fund 


•••BUDGET**"**** 
Revision 7ii/r8 Revised 


Httchy/ 

















PUC/UEB 
12 DPW/BOE 


CPF 
CPF 
CPF 
CPF 
CPF 














sc 

5C 

5C 

JC 

_5C_ 


R&R 
R&R 
R&R 
R&R 
R&R 




/ 


S 10.000.00. 
S 20.000.00. 
S 100.000.00. 
5 10.000.00 . 

$ 

$ 140.000.00 




S 10.000.00 
S 20.000.00 
S 70.000.00 


13 DPW/BCM 






40 Construction 


5 (30.000.00) 

s irxooo.oo 

$ 20.000.00 

s 


60 BOE Consultant 


S 20.000.00 
S 20.000.00 
S 140.000.00 


80 Other Direct Costs - Claims 




t^ 


TOTAL 









Type \J[D; 


Project: 


Phase: 




Program: 






Title: 


Project Manager 






Index 


DcpL Rep.: 
Existing 








Fund 

Tvpe Fund 


Sub 

Fund 






Deui/Div 
Water/ 


Revision 


Revised 


Herchy/ 












PUOUEB 




































TOTAL 





















EXPLANATION: 

Additional Funds for Technical Services 




p» use by PUC Finance: 

. ,/rTXrx.iloc 



Jury 14. 1997 



98fl 



bcc'on 



T9t^ sss stf «- soimtiyaAH soa rudds T£:iT 



86/62/60 



Attachment ] 



RECEIVED 



Shimmick Construction Co., Inc. 



24200 Clawiter Road 
Hayward, CA 94545 



jun o i «» IN voiCE 

BCM 



(510)293-1100 



SOUS TO: 

| City and County of San Francisco 

• Public Utilities Commission 

j Utiftres Engineering Bureau - Contract Admin. Drv 

Attention: Fe Bongolan 

1 1 55 Market Street, 5th Floor 

San Francisco. CA 94103 



INVOICE NUMBER 

INVOICE DATE 

OUR J03 NUMBER 

CONTRACT NO. 



PROJECT: 

Emergency Sewer Replacement 

425 Noriega Stfaet 

San Francisco. CA 

Contract No. CW-158 



43-1 

5/22/98 

43 

CW-156 



j£jjg^^gg^^ 



First and final bMng on above contract, per Time and Material 
wor* bite previous^ submitted 



W2H X 



SUBTOTAL 

TAX 

FREIGHT 



4C.273.0C 



Questions concerning tnis invoice? 
Cat BID Barend or Scot: Fairgrieve 

(510)293-1100 



MAKE ALL CHECKS PAYABLE TC: 

Snimmicx Ccnstrjc5on Co.. Inc. 



$40,278.00 
PA.YTMS 
AMOUNT 



ST 



uza 



0££TJN 



8 

T9W3 252 STfr * SDITnbcXUH ^ ^^ 



TE^T 



Attachment III 




AGENDA ITEM 



DEPARTMENT: Utilities Engineering Bareaa AGENDA NO. 



MEETING date September IS, 1998 
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION: 

Approval of the Declaration of Emergency by the President of the Public Utilities Commission for Clean Water 
Program Con tractNo. CW-1 56, "425 Noriega Street Emergency Sewer Replacement" and Requesting the Board 
of Supervisors to approve the expenditure of funds for the emergency work to replace the structurally inadequate 
easement sewer parallel to Noriega Street near 11* Avenue (at 425 Noriega S treet) between Moraga Street and 
Noriega Street. 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION: 

The work performed under this Emergency consisted of repairing the broken 8-inch diameter vitrified clay pipe 
easement sewer and shoring it on sand-cement slurry, keyed into the undisturbed sand; removing the sand from the 
patio area; removing the vegetation and roots from the cavity created by the erosion; and regrading the slope and 
placing erosion control material on the surface. 

On January 18, 1998, DPWBurcau of Street and Sewer Repair, the Fire Department, and the property owner of 
425 Noriega Street built a temporary pipe for the broken sewer and a makeshift canal to channel any additional 
storm runoff to the street. On January 20, 1998, due to the nature of the emergency, PUC Sewer Operations 
requested immediate contract action to prevent any further damage to the property at 425 Noriega Street. As a 
result, DPW (Hydraulics and the Bureau of Construction Management) requested Treadwell and Rollo. a 
geotec hnical engineering firm to conduct an analysis of the current situation and make recommendations for 
reconstruction of the slope and implementation of the repairs. Since immediate mobilization of a Contractor was 
required to prevent any further damage to the property, the first Contractor that was available to arrive on-site the 
same day was awarded the contract. The first contractor to respond was Shimmick Construction Co., Inc., and 
con struction cost wa s negotiated to be on a Time and Material basis. 

APPROVALS: 

DtPAjmiC-r/ FTMAHC2 

■VK&ALI 



L-nunis c*a. 



ttCTKTAKT 



9 

9C£ ' 0N T9W3 SS2 STfr « SOITTbatlW 309 HdOdS Z\:L\ &SVL/&Z 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item lc- File 98-1604 



Department: 



Item: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $136,725 for emergency work to repair the 
structurally inadequate sewer in York Street between 
Precita Avenue and Peralta Avenue. 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



Comments: 



$136,725 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on January 
20, 1998, the sewer located in York Street between 
Precita Avenue and Peralta Avenue failed, and immediate 
repairs were required in order to protect the health, 
welfare, and property of the citizens of San Francisco. 
The PUC declared an emergency on January 20, 1998. In 
accordance with Section 6.30 of the Administrative Code, 
the PUC initiated expedited contract procedures, and 
awarded a contract to K.J. Woods Construction, Inc. 
(Woods), the low bidder, in the amount of $86,000. 

The total estimated project cost is $136,725, including 
$109,075 in actual construction costs (or $23,075 more 
than the bid amount; see Comment No. 2) and $27,650 for 
DPW engineering and construction management costs. 
Attachment I details the DPW engineering and 
construction management costs. 

1. Mr. P. T. Law of the DPW advises that Woods 
submitted the low bid for the emergency repair work. The 
table below lists the bidders and the amounts bid: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Bidder Bid Amount 

K.J. Woods Construction, Inc. $86,000 

Alpine Construction, Inc. $93,480 

Harty Pipelines, Inc. $94,230 

Uniacke Construction Co., Inc. $102,800 

J.M.B. Construction, Inc. $113,335 

Ranger Pipelines, Inc. $116,764 

Shaw Pipelines, Inc. $124,339 

2. According to Mr. Law, DPW's Bureau of Construction 
Management identified the need for additional sewer 
repair and street reconstruction work subsequent to the 
contract award. Attachment II is a Change Order form 
showing the additional cost of $23,075, which increased 
the final contract cost to $109,075 from the bid amount of 
$86,000. 

3. Mr. Law reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on February 3, 1998 and was completed on 
March 2, 1998. 

4. Mr. Law advises that due to various delays in receiving 
expenditure documentation from the Contractor, the PUC 
is requesting approval of this proposed resolution 
approximately seven months after the construction work 
was completed. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
11 



Attachment I 



Cost Breakdown for ( J.O. #1581N, Contract #CW-155) 
York Street Emergency Sewer Replacement 



Bureau of Engineering 



Classification 


Title 


Rate 


Hours 




Cost 


5504 
5206 
5202 
5366 
5381 
1425 


Project Manager II 

Associate Civil Engineer 

Junior Civil Engineer 

Civil Engineering Associate 11 

Engineering Student Trainee II 

Secr9tary 


$ 
$ 

$ 
S 
$ 
S 


92 
75 
50 
60 
33 
43 


7 
33 

80 

99 
25 
41 


S 
$ 
$ 
$ 
$ 
$ 


644 
2,475 
4,000 
5,940 

825 
1,753 



Rounded: $ 



15,647 

15,650 



Bureau of Construction Management 



Classification 


Title 


I 


Rate 


Hours 




Cost 


5210 


Senior Civil Engineer 


5 


100 


6 


$ 


600 


5208 


Civil Engineer 


$ 


80 


11 


$ 


880 


5204 


Assistant Civil Engineer 


$ 


53 


98 


$ 


5.782 


5318 


Construction Inspector 


$ 


74 


64 


$ 


4,735 



Rounded: $ 



11,998 
12,000 



20fl 



ecz'ON 



12 

13*0 ZSZ STfr * SDimtfyQAH 50H ndddS 



1Z--i.l 



86/6S/60 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 
Bureau of Construction Management 



Attachment II 



CHANGE ORDER 



Project: YORKSTREET EMERGENCY SEWER REPLACEMENT 



Date: 



5-26-98 



To: Mr. Maurice Williams 

BCM. 1680 Mission Street. 4" Floor 
San Francisco. CA 94 103 



Chanee Order No. 01 



CW 155E 



58 IN 



Contract No: 

Spec. No: 

Controller No. ENWP98000013 

Subject: ADDITION 

WORK SCOPE 



The Contractor is hereby directed to provide all labor, materials, equipment, and supplies to complete the following 
work in conformance with applicable contract specifications. 

1. The Scope of Work consisted of replacement of half a concrete street due to PGiE work scope along one side 
of York Street before the sewer construction and together with the sewer replacement that took place in the center of the 
street which caused the remaining street to be in a unstable condition. BCM and PG&E agreed to replace the street in a 
joint effort to minimize construction joint and to provide more uniform street surface to better serve the community. 
BCM share of cost is S 1 8,543.00 

2. The other work scope consisted of Contractor encountering unforeseen lean concrete fill at an existing main 
sewer Bench where the pipes were to be replaced. On top of that there was another cave in condition that occurred 
during construction other than the original cave in. Contractor requested S4.527.00 for the force account work for this 
situation. 

The original contract price is SS6.000.00. The total amount requested for change order *1 totals S23.075.00. The 
forecast total for the contract is $ 1 09.075.00. 



Requesting to ADD the following to the Pay Schedule: 

Item Description 

C.O."l 1. Concrete street reconstruction 

2. Unforeseen site condition 



Quantity 

Total area 4585 sq ft 
force account dated 2-6-98 
2-13,2-17, 2-20-98 



Total Amount 
518,54800 
5 4.527.00 
523,075.00 



The Conrjactor and the Clcy acknowledge thai this agreement constitutes full accord and satisfaction for all issues and claims 
addressed herein, including productivity losses, acceleration, re-sequencing of the work, escalation and'or claims submitted or not 
submitted by the Subcontractors and suppliers. The contractor also agrees to identify the City against the schedule impact of all other 
known or unknown issues thai have impacted the project schedule. 

Plans Attached: 



Estimated Cost 



Decrease S 



increases S23.075.00 



By Reason Of This Change Order. Contract Time Will Be Adjusted N/A Calendar Days 



Distribution 



Contractor (I) 
Contract Admin. 
Controller 

Cotiscr. Management (2) 
Conjtr. Contracts 
Scheduim; &. Control 
Project Engineer 
Project Manager 



Change Request By- 



Date: 



Cost Verified By: 0>^\ 
Recommended By: 
Recommended By: 
Accepted By: 
Approved By: 




S-zi> °>% 



SA'/?8 



?/uJl? 



Date: £-*>-<{?> 



44H- 



Nouce u> Contractors: Vou may proceed uith the wort speciti<d Herein uto u u for S20 .000 or lesi »"d^aj Seen jjtrove* for Uk CCSF 0> the 
appropriate authority and signed by the Contractor. Payment u ill ^eSuuiWized by the Controller 



PliC General Manager/Designee 



» AWM 



13 



fr0fl 



0££TJN 



I9fr0 ZSZ STfr <- SDITDtiaaAH 308 HcKIJS 



T£:il 



96 62 SB 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 2 - File 98-1456 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of 
September 23, 1998. 



Department: 
Item: 



Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 
Lessee: 
Number of Sq. Ft. 

Amount Payable 
to Airport: 



Term of Lease: 



Description: 



Airport Commission 

Resolution approving a new "North Terminal 
Concession Opportunity Lease" between Host 
International, Inc. (Host) and the City and County of 
San Francisco, acting by and through the Airport 
Commission. 

This new lease provides for Host's management of 
eight concession businesses in the Airport's North 
Terminal. 

City and County of San Francisco 

Host International, Inc. 

Approximately 5,804 square feet in six retail spaces 
operated by eight concessionaires. 



The proposed lease would require Host to pay the 
Airport the greater of a minimum annual guarantee of 
$1,200,000 for the first year of the lease term or a 
percentage of gross revenues realized by Host. 
According to the lease, the annual percentage of gross 
revenues is 12% for the first $1,000,000, 14% between 
1,000,001 and $1,500,000, and 16% for all gross 
revenues in excess of $1,500,000. The lease also 
provides for annual increases in the Minimum Annual 
Guarantee based on increases in the Department Store 
Inventory Price Index-Soft Goods 1 for the remaining 
four years of the lease term. 

Five years, estimated to begin on December 9, 1998, 
upon completion of the required renovation work by 
Host and to end on December 8, 2003. 

The proposed resolution would approve a new lease of 
the North Terminal Concessions at the San Francisco 



1 According to Ms. Judy Tabimina of the Airport, soft goods are defined as retail goods such 
as toys, sunglasses, and books. The Airport has determined that this price index is the most 
appropriate one to apply to leases for Airport concessions. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



International Airport, entitled "North Terminal 
Concession Opportunity 2 Lease" between Host and the 
City. Under the proposed lease, the eight concessions 
would occupy a total of 5,804 square feet. Host would 
directly operate four of the eight concessions totaling 
2,523 square feet, or approximately 43 percent of the 
total square footage. Host would also have two sub- 
lessees, including SunShade Holding Corporation 
(SunShade), a Minority-owned Business Enterprise 
(MBE), which would operate two concessions totaling 
587 square feet, and CalStar Retail, Inc. (CalStar, 
formerly Del Duca Enterprises, Inc., the prior lessee), 
a Women-owned Business Enterprise (VVBE), which 
would operate two concessions totaling 2,694 square 
feet. The 3,281 square feet sub-leased by the MBE 
and WBE constitute approximately 57 percent of the 
total square footage 

The following table identifies the six retail spaces, the 
name of each concession business, the operator of each 
business, the types of goods sold by each business, and 
the square footage (SF) occupied by each business. 



Space 


Name 


Operator 


Goods Sold 


SF 


A 


Awesome Atom's 


CalStar 


Educational Toys 


1,692 


B 


SF News Exchange 


Host 


News, Retail Goods 


312 


C 


SF News Exchange 


Host 


News, Retail Goods 


311 


D 


Watch Zone 


SunShade 


Watches 


337 


E 


Sun Shade Optique 


SunShade 


Sunglasses 


250 


F 


Vroom-Toys that Travel 


CalStar 


Toys 


1,002 


F 


Wilson's 


Host 


Leather Goods 


898 


F 


Simply Books 


Host 


Books 


1,002 



Total 5,804 

Prior to commencement of the proposed lease, Host is 
required to invest a minimum of $150 per square foot 
to renovate the 5,804 square feet of space covered by 
the lease, or a minimum investment of $870,600. The 
space consists of 2,652 square feet included in the 
prior lease with CalStar 3 and 3,152 square feet to be 



2 According to Ms. Tabimina, the Airport's concession leases typically include the word 
'Opportunity' to indicate the concessionaire's opportunity to conduct business at the Airport. 

3 Del Duca's lease was for a total of 3,201 square feet. According to Ms. Tabimina, 549 square 
feet included in that lease have been leased separately to another lessor. The remaining 
2,652 square feet are included in the proposed lease to Host. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

included for the first time in the proposed lease to 
Host. 4 According to Ms. Judy Tabimina of the Airport, 
Host began the renovation work on September 9, 1998. 
Attachment I provided by the Airport is a 
memorandum explaining why the Airport initiated 
this work prior to obtaining approval of the proposed 
lease by the Board of Supervisors. 

According to Mr. Bob Rhoades of the Airport, Host and 
its sub-lessees have proposed new retail "concepts" for 
the proposed lease. Therefore, according to Mr. 
Rhoades, the Airport has not forecast future revenues 
to the Airport based on the percentages of gross rent. 
As shown in Attachment II provided by Mr. Rhoades, 
the total estimated revenue of $6,121,206 to be paid by 
Host to the City over the five-year term of the lease is 
therefore based on the first-year Minimum Annual 
Guarantee of $1,200,000 and projected annual 
increases of an estimated 1.0 percent over this first- 
year figure for the five-year term of the proposed lease. 
According to Mr. Rhoades, the 1.0 percent figure 
approximates the annual increases in the Department 
Store Inventory Price Index-Soft Goods during the 
five-year term of the prior lease with Del Duca. The 
$6,121,206 estimated to be paid by Host is $272,517 
more than the $5,848,689 paid by Del Duca (now 
CalStar) over the past five years, as shown in 
Attachment II. 

Comments: 1. The Airport Commission adopted Resolution No. 98- 

0150 on June 23, 1998, recommending the award of 
the lease to the proposed lessee, Host International, 
Inc., based on a competitive bidding process. The 
award was based on the highest Minimum Annual 
Guarantee bid amount. According to Ms. Tabimina, 
the Minimum Annual Guarantee bid for the proposed 
lease was set at $800,000 per year based on a study 
commissioned by the Airport. The Minimum Annual 
Guarantee for the period from May 15, 1997 to May 
14, 1998, or the final year of the prior lease term with 
CalStar, was $1,178,640 (on a $98,220 monthly basis), 
or $21,360 less than the proposed Minimum Annual 



4 The 3,152 square feet were previously used for United Airlines' frequent flyer lounge, the 
IK Club, according to Ms. Tabimina. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Guarantee of $1,200,000. As shown in Attachment III 
provided by the Airport, two proposals for this lease 
were received by the Airport, one from Host and the 
other from Brookstone, Inc. As explained in 
Attachment III, the Airport found "that the 
Brookstone proposal was unacceptable." 

3. The prior lease with CalStar expired on May 14, 
1998. However, according to Ms. Tabimina, the 
Airport extended CalStar's lease through September 8, 
1998, for the same monthly Minimum Annual 
Guarantee payment of $98,220 required during the 
final year of CalStar's lease term. 

4. The proposed lease provides that Host will either (a) 
obtain a surety bond in an amount equal to one-half of 
the minimum annual guarantee payment of 
$1,200,000, or $600,000, which would be payable to 
the Airport in the event of non-payment of rent or non- 
monetary default under the terms of the proposed 
lease, or (b) deposit with the Airport an Irrevocable 
Letter of Credit, Certificate of Deposit, Certified 
Check, Money Order, or Cashier's Check equal to an 
amount of one-half of the minimum annual guarantee 
payment of $1,200,000, or $600,000, as security for 
faithful performance of the lease terms by Host. 

5. As noted above, according to Mr. Rhoades, Host 
began the renovation work required under the 
proposed lease on September 9, 1998. As previously 
noted, Attachment I provided by the Airport is a 
memorandum explaining why the Airport initiated 
this work prior to obtaining approval of the proposed 
lease by the Board of Supervisors. 



Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter 
for the Board of Supervisors since the Airport 
authorized Host to begin the renovation work under 
the proposed lease prior to obtaining approval of the 
lease by the Board of Supervisors and since the 
minimum annual guarantee was negotiated solely 
with Host. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Airport 
Ctraaenku 

City ad Coutty 
ot San Francisco 

WUUeL.Braw.Jr. 
Utynr 

Henry E. Bermao 
Prasidtni 

RornJA.Quao 
Vee President 
UldtvlS-annsky 
Larry Mason 

LixaS. -TYtai 

JOHN L MARTIN 

Airport OUsctor 



Attachment I 
Page 1 of 2 




San Francisco International Airport 



CXrEWAYTOTWMOnC 

VIA FACSIMILE 
(415) 252-0461 

September 17, 1998 



Mr. Nick Levinson 

Budget Analyst 

Board of Supervisors 

War Memorial Building 

401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

Subject: Host International, Inc. 

North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease 

Dear Nick 

Host International, Inc. was awarded the North Terminal Concession Opportunity 
Lease by Airport Co mmissi on Resolution No. 98-0150, adopted June 23, 1998. 

In cases such as this, due to the tight construction schedule and to ensure that 
facilities are operational in time for the holidays, we permit tenants to co mme nce 
demolition before all of the requisite approvals are obtained which, in most cases, are 
routine. As a matter of practice, demolition always takes place as soon as the 
previous lease expires. 

As you requested, enclosed please find the following information that you requested 
from Ms. Judy Tabimina of the Concession Development and Management 
Department: 

• Copy of HRC's provisional approval. 

• The Minimum Annual Guarantee of $ 1 2 million is the key figure in this 
case. Since new concepts are being tried, we have not forecasted future 
revenues that would be tied to the percentage rent 

• In FY 97/98, CalStar Retail, Inc. grossed $7,215,178 in revenues. 

• Copy of the Consumer Price Index. 



SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT . P.O. BOX 8097 • SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA 94128 • TELEPHONE (550) 794-5000 • FAX (650) 794-5005 

18 
T0'd T9t^2S2STt7T6 ifr:60 866T-iT-d3S 



Attachment I 
Page 'I of. 2 



Mr. Niefc Levmscn 
Sqnenber 17. 199» 
Pije2 



Please fax your draft report (fax no. (650) 794-4005) for my review. Should you 
have further questions, please call me at (650) 794-5036. 



Sincerely 



I'M 




\BojLXhoades 
Deputy Airport Director 
Business and Finance 
Enclosures 

cc: Judy Tabimina 



19 

20 *d t9fr0SSSSIfT6 • 8f:60 866T-<LT-d=S 



SEP-18-1998 09:51 FROM SFIfl-BUS DEU & MGMT 




Attachment II 
Page 1 of 2 



AIRPORT COMMISSION 



Department of Concession Dcveiopmt 



rind SVliinaytrriC-nt 



San Francisco International Airpor 

ITAYTOTIt 



GATtWAY TO THE IK OTC 



Post Offica Bcoc 8097 

San Francisco International Airport 

San Francisco, CA 94128 

TELEPHONE: (650)794-4500 

FACSIMILE: (650)794-4519 



F 
A 
X 



To: 


Mr. Nick Levinson - City Budget Analyst Office 


From 


Lorri A. Vasquez - Asst Deputy Airport Director for Concession Development and 
Management Department 


Date: 


Friday. September 1 8. 1 998 


Fax: 


(A15) 252-0461 


Re: 


North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease 


# Of Pages; 


2, including cover sheet 


□ Please Q Please □ For your □ Please reply ^ Per your . 
review and handle irrforrnation request 
comment 


You D *31 E2 wfll not receive a hard copy. 



Comments: 

Mr. Levinson: 



Per your request, the following is the anticipated minimum annual guarantee (MAG) for 
the Airport from Host International, Inc., Lessee for the North Terminal Concession 
Opportunity Lease. The term of this Lease is five years. 



Year 


Anticipated MAG 


1 


$1,200,000 


2 


$1,212,000 


3 


$1,224,120 


4 


$1,236,361 


5 


$1,248,725 


TOTAL 


$6,121,206 



Attached is the off-calendar memo sent to the Airport Commission regarding the 
outcome of the North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease RFQ/P process. 




• -SEP-18-1998 09: 51 fro, SFIA-BUS DEU & rQnT T0 

CS/18J98 10:39 ID:W?VHY h< ^ 



^J£K : 4i5-252-0461 



r 






914152520461 p. 02 

f*Gc 2 

Attachment II 
Page 2 of 2 

•.xt 



l«71A Propw^r MOW0B3 

[A/CIUloWcn: 
PXBBW Bt 

'JU^tmi Code 

• pnypc 



Norfi T*mtt»J 3«rffe$ Artt 5 

1£«504 

LPXBOA 

37511 (Jbrawriy 90*5) 



SsftOeodJ 1 



I Du»Dit» 

: Mau 

! 1993 

. 1994 

', 1993 

! ' J996 

« 1997 

'. 199* 



(A3 



« 



teaa Oo»p«."i«» 



595 
595 
595 

595 
595 



losUs 

597.9 
605.7 
606.1 
60&< 



B : .d 
IL16M"- M 



£*£A1 



MAO 



1.000739 S1,1S2,UX.C3 
1.0146211 tLJLlijHtM 
).01!6553 Sl.ni,M6.Tl 
\ei9l597 si.ni.539.5: 

saoo 



$96^T33C' 
S96J4*3i! 
X97 f ?C«4! 
J9t,171J9l 
S9*.219.9» , 
SO.OC j 



TOTAL: $5,848,689.05 



09A6/99 



n 'd T9WS32S:mS 



21 



TOTAL P. 02 



SEP-18-199B 12:02 FROM SFIfl-BUS DEU & MGMT 



Airport 
Commruioa 

CitYiftflCouMy 
ct San Franesco 

Willie L Brown. Jt. 

Henry E. Berman 
President 

Roland A. Quan 
Vie President 

maun s. strwsKj 

Larry Masola 
Uoda S. Clayton 

JOHN L MARTIN 
Airport Director 



TO 




914152520461 P. 02 

Attachment. Ill 
Page 1 of 3 



San Francisco International Airport 



Sinwtv tc th; *icir.z 



MEMORANDUM 



May 14, 1998 



TO: AIRPORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Henry E. Berman, President 
Hon. Roland A. Quan, Vice President 
Hon. Michael S. Strunsky 
Hon. Larry Mazzola 
Hon. Linda S. Crayton 

FROM: Airport Director 

SUBJECT: Approval of Proposal of Host International, Rejection of Proposal 
of Brookstone, and Authorization of Director to Negotiate 
Minimum Annual Guarantee for North Terminal Concession 
Opportunity Lease. • • 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: ADOPTION OF THE 
ACCOMPANYING RESOLUTION WHICH APPROVES PROPOSAL OF ' 
HOST INTERNATIONAL, REJECTS PROPOSAL OF BROOKSTONE, AND 
AUTHORIZES DIRECT OR TO NEGOTIATE MINIMUM ANNUAL 
GUARANTEE FOR NORTH TERMINAL CONCESSION OPPORTUNITY 
LEASE. 



Background 

By Airport Commission Resolution No. 98-0051, the Airport Commission 
authorized staff to issue a Request for Qualification/Proposal (RFQ/P) for the 
North Terminal Concession Opportunity Lease. Host Internationai and 
Brookstone submitted packages in response to the RFP/Q. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 



g 



SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT • P.O. BOX 8097 . SAN FRANOSC0 CALIFORNIA 94128 - TELEPHONE (6S0) 784-5000 • FAX (650) 794-5005 



22 



•SEP-18-1998 12:03 FROM SFIft-BUS DEU 8. MGMT TO 914152520461 P. 03 

. " Attachment III 



Page 2 of 3 



Member;. Airport Commission 
May 14. 1998 
Page 2 



The goal of the RPQ/P was to ensure that prospective bidders were qualified and 
that their proposals were acceptable to the Airport. The proposals were reviewed 
by a five-member panel using the following criteria: Airport experience - 10 
points, Tenant Mix - 70 points, Operations/Management Plan - 1 points, and 
Design Intent - 1 points. The Tenant Mix, the largest component of the score, 
addressed the proposed concept and theme, utilization of national, regional and 
local brand name companies, and the utilization of Disadvantaged Business 
Enterprise ("DBE") set-asides 

The reviewing panel determined that the Host proposal was acceptable; Host had 
adequate Airport experience, and the tenant mix, operation/management plan, and 
design intent were acceptable. In particular. Host's proposal stated that it would 
provide 57% of total square footage to DBE participation, which exceeds the 
Airport's requirement of 30%. The Human Rights Commission (HRC) is 
currently reviewing Host's Benefits Ordinance declarations and employee . 
workforce plans to determine whether Host is in compliance with Chapter 12B of 
the Administrative Code Certification of Benefits Ordinance compliance had not 
been received as of this writing but is expected shortly. 

The panel determined that the Brookstone proposal was unacceptable. In 
particular, Brookstone' s proposal did not identify a subleasing plan. 

The rejection of Brookstone 's proposal will result in only one eligible bidder, 
Host International, Inc. Under these rare circumstances, Airport staff has 
determined that a bid would not be in the best interests of the City. Instead, to 
maximize the rent structure, Airport staff recommends that Director be authorized 
to negotiate the Minimum Annual Guarantee with Host, which Minimum Annual 
Guarantee shall not be less than the Minimum Annual Guarantee specified in the 
RFQ/P, $800,000. 

Modifications to the Lease 

Per the original Lease specifications, the Airport was to build, at its own cost, a 
common storefront framing on all of the stores. Staff has determined that only 
two facilities (Space B and F) will incorporate the common storefront framing. 
Further, due to the security checkpoint relocation occurring in the North 
Terminal, Space E will be relocated to a comparable location on the other side of 
Space C (map attached). These modifications will be conveyed to Host 
International and will be reflected in the final Lease. 



23 



■SEP-18-1998 12:03 FROM SFIft-BUS DEU 8. MGMT TO 914152528461 P. 04 

- ' Attachment III 



Page 3 of 3 



Members. Airport Commission 

May 14, 1998 

Pagc3 



Recommendation 



Based upon the evaluation by the panel, I recommend adoption of the attached 
Resolution approving Host's Proposal, rejecting Brookstonc's Proposal, and 
authorizing the Director to negotiate the Minimum Annual Guarantee, which will 
not be less than $300,000, subject to Human Rights Commission's determination 
of Host's 12B Compliance. I will return to you for your approval of the 
negotiated Minimum Annual Guarantee and the award of the Lease. 




John!-. Martin 
• Airport Director 

Prepared by: BobRhoades 
Attachments 



24 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 3 - File 98-1503 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Ethics Commission 

Ordinance amending Article XII C of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code by amending Article XIIC, Section 
16.543(C) to add a fee schedule for campaign consultants 
and to require the Ethics Commission to evaluate the fee 
schedule in 1999 and propose any amendments to the fee 
schedule to the Board of Supervisors for approval by 
December 1, 1999. 

In November of 1997, the voters approved Proposition G, 
the Campaign Consultants Ordinance, Article XIIC, 
Sections 16.540 to 16.547 of the Administrative Code. 
The ordinance defines a campaign consultant as "any 
person or entity that receives or is promised economic 
consideration equaling $1,000 or more in a calendar year 
for campaign consulting services", which are in turn 
defined as "participating in campaign management or 
developing or participating in the development of 
campaign strategy." The ordinance provides that 
campaign consultants who earn $1,000 or more in a 
calendar year must register annually and report on a 
quarterly basis as to income received from clients and 
certain campaign expenditures. Under the ordinance, the 
Ethics Commission was to propose annual fees to be paid 
by campaign consultants, including (a) registration fees 
and (b) client fees for each of the campaign consultant's 
clients. The Ethics Commission intends that these fees 
would defray the Ethics Commission's expenses to 
administer the Campaign Consultants Ordinance. The 
proposed fees must be submitted for approval by the 
Board of Supervisors no later than December 1 st for 
implementation during the following calendar year. 

In accordance with Proposition G, this ordinance would 
establish a schedule of fees to be charged to campaign 
consultants for Calendar Year 1999. Specifically, (a) 
campaign consultants earning at least $1,000 but not 
more than $5,000 per calendar year would be exempt 
from payment of an annual registration fee but would be 
required to pay a $50 annual fee for each of the campaign 
consultants' clients; (b) campaign consultants earning 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

25 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

more than $5,000 but not more than $20,000 per calendar 
year would pay a $300 annual registration fee and a $100 
annual fee for each client; and (c) campaign consultants 
earning more than $20,000 per calendar year would pay a 
$796 annual registration fee and a $125 annual fee for 
each client. 

The proposed ordinance also requires the Ethics 
Commission to evaluate, on or after July 1, 1999, the fees 
that would be established under this proposed ordinance, 
and to propose any changes in the fees for Calendar Year 
2000 for approval by the Board of Supervisors by no later 
than December 1, 1999. If the Ethics Commission takes 
no action in 1999 regarding proposed fees for Calendar 
Year 2000, then the fees provided for in the proposed 
ordinance for Calendar Year 1999 would remain in effect. 

Comments: 1. Proposition G, the Campaign Consultants Ordinance, 

required that the Ethics Commission propose a fee 
structure for approval by the Board of Supervisors by 
December 1 st for implementation during the following 
calendar year. According to Ms. Naomi Starkman of the 
Ethics Commission, there are no existing fees in place for 
campaign consultants for Calendar Year 1998. As 
previously noted, the proposed fees would be effective for 
Calendar Year 1999. 

2. According to Ms. Starkman, based on an estimated 50 
campaign consultants and a total of 75 clients, or an 
average of 1.5 clients for each campaign consultant, the 
Ethics Commission estimates that 16 campaign 
consultants would earn between $1,000 and $5,000 
during Calendar Year 1999; 15 campaign consultants 
would earn between $5,001 and $20,000 during Calendar 
Year 1999; and 19 campaign consultants would earn more 
than $20,000 during Calendar Year 1999. 

3. As shown in Attachment I provided by Ms. Starkman, 
the proposed fees are estimated to generate $34,047 in 
Calendar Year 1999 or $17,023 in revenue for Fiscal Year 
1998-99. 

4. The estimated $17,023 in revenues for Fiscal Year 
1998-99 was not included in the budget of the Ethics 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Commission due to the lack of information available at 
the time the Ethics Commission's budget was prepared, 
according to Ms. Starkman. The proposed ordinance 
specifies that the fee revenues from campaign consultants 
realized by the Ethics Commission would accrue to the 
General Fund. 

5. As shown in Attachment II provided by Ms. Starkman, 
the administrative costs of the Ethics Commission to 
administer the Regulation of Campaign Consultants 
Ordinance is estimated at $39,822 for Calendar Year 
1999 or $19,911 for Fiscal Year 1998-99. According to Ms. 
Starkman, this $19,911 cost is not included in the Ethics 
Commission's Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget. According to 
Ms. Starkman, the Ethics Commission plans to request a 
Supplemental Appropriation to cover these estimated 
costs of $19,911 for Fiscal Year 1998-99. The proposed fee 
revenues would serve as a funding source for that 
Supplemental Appropriation request, according to Ms. 
Starkman. The estimated shortfall for Fiscal Year 1998- 
99 to administer the proposed ordinance would be $2,888 
(costs of $19,911 less revenues of $17,023). Based on 
estimated revenues of $17,023 and estimated costs of 
$19,911, the proposed revenues would recover 
approximately 85 percent of costs. The anticipated 
shortfall of $2,888 would be absorbed in the Ethics 
Commission's Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget, according to 
Ms. Starkman. 

6. According to Ms. Starkman, after receiving the final 
campaign consultant reports for FY 1998-99 and 
evaluating whether changes in the proposed fees are 
appropriate, the Ethics Commission could propose a 
revised fee schedule for Calendar Year 2000 for approval 
by the Board of Supervisors by no later than December 1, 
1999 in accordance with the Campaign Consultants 
Ordinance. Although these fees were originally 
anticipated to fully recover the Ethics Commission's 
actual costs to administer the Campaign Consultants 
Ordinance, according to Ms. Starkman, the fees for 
Calendar Year 2000 would most likely be proposed at a 
level to recover an as-yet-undetermined percentage, 
rather than 100 percent, of the estimated costs, in order 
to maintain the fees at a reasonable level. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Attachment 



STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION #1 

Projected Cal. Year 1999 and FY 98-99 (6 months) Revenue from 
Campaign Consultant Program 



Filers Earning Between $1,000 and $5,000 
($0 registration fee and $50 client fee) 



Filers Earning Between $5,000 and $20,000 
($300 registration fee and $100 client fee) 





# of filers 


Recommended 
Fee 


Total 


Campaign 
Consultant 
Registration 


16 


SO 


$0 


Client 

Registration 


24 


$50 


$1,200 




Late Filing 
Fine 


13.3 


S50 


$665 




13.3 


$100 


$1,330 










Cal. Year 1999 (12 months total) 




$3,195 


FY 98-99 (6 months) 




$1,597 


Cost of administration of program 


covered 


8% 





# of filers 


Recommended 
Fee 


Total 


Campaign 
Consultant 
Registration 


15 


$300 


$4,500 


Client 
Registration 


22.5 


$100 


$2,250 



Late Filing 
Fine 


13.3 


S50 


$665 




13.3 


S100 


$1,330 



Cal. Year 1999 (12 months total) 



FY 98-99 (6 months) 



$8,745 



Cost of administration of program covered 



$4,372 



22% 



Filers Earning More Than $20,000 

($796 registration fee and $175 client fee) 





# of filers 


Recommended 
Fee 


Total 


Campaign 
Consultant 

Registration 


19 


S796 


$15,124 


Client 
Registration 


28.5 


$175 


$4,988 




Late Filing 
Fine 


13.3 


$50 


$665 




13.3 


S100 


$1,330 










Cal. Year 1999 (12 months total) 




$22,107 


FY 98-99 (6 months) 




$11,053 


Cost of administration of program 


covered 


55% 



Total revenue for CY 99 = $34,047 



Total cost of administration for CY 99 = $39,822 



Total cost of program covered = 85% 



Estimated shortfall = $5,775 



Revenue for FY 98-99 (6 mos.) = $17,023 



Cost of administration for FY 98-99 (6 mos.) = $19,911 



Cost of program covered for FY 98-99 = 85% 



Estimated shortfall = $2,888 



29 



Attachment II 



Attachment 1 

Annual Estimated Costs of Administering 
Campaign Consultant Program 



Tasks 


Work Hours 


Reproduction Costs 


Mailing Costs 


Advice 


480 






Notification/Mailing 


100 


S240 


S1.000 


Intake/Receipt 


60 






Facial Audit 


60 






Quarterly Report Production/Distribution 


320 


S256 


$150 


Addition/Termination of Clients 


200 


S6 




Bookkeeping 


160 






Press Release 


12 






Totals 


1392 


$502 


$1,150 




1392 x $21* 
(salary) = 
$29,232 x .21% 
(fringes) = 
$6,139 + 
$29,232 = 








$35,371 





Average salaries of Investigator/Auditor, Executive Director, 
and Administrative Assistant 



Task 


Work Hours 


Reproduction Costs 


Mailing Costs 


Formal Audit 


120 


$20 


$20 




120 x $19* 
(salary) = 
$2,280 x. 21% 
(fringes) = $479 
+ $2,280 = 






$2,759 





* Salary of Campaign Finance Auditor 



TOTALS 



$35,371 + 
$2,759 = 
$38,130 


$522 


$1,170 



GRAND TOTAL $39,822 



$39.822750 (estimated number of filers) = 

|$796 campaign consultant registration fee 

$796 x .66 (amount of time spent on filer) = $525 
$796 x .33 (amount of time spent on client) = $262 
$262/1 .5 (average number of clients) = 
|$175 client registration fee ~| 



30 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 4 - File 98-1600 
Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Description: 



Parking Authority 

Mayor's Office of Public Finance 

Resolution approving the issuance of Lease Revenue 
Refunding Bonds of the Parking Authority, for 
refinancing of bonds issued in 1988, which refinanced the 
original bonds used to fund the Moscone Center Garage, 
and approving the execution and delivery of a project 
lease between the Parking Authority, as Lessor, and the 
City, as Lessee (including certain indemnification 
provisions therein), approving a continuing disclosure 
certificate relating to said bonds, approving the form and 
circulation of an official statement relating to said bonds, 
authorizing the payment of certain costs of issuance from 
the proceeds of such bonds, ratifying previous actions 
taken in connection with the foregoing matters, and 
authorizing the taking of appropriate actions in 
connection therewith. 

Not to exceed $8,250,000 

In 1982, the Parking Authority issued $11,470,000 in 
Lease Revenue Bonds to finance the construction of the 
-Moscone Center Garage. In 1988, the Parking Authority 
issued $10,065,000 in Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds to 
refinance the 1982 Bonds. 

Approval of this resolution would authorize the Parking 
Authority to issue Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, 
Series 1998-1, in an amount not to exceed $8,250,000, in 
order to refund the previously authorized 1988 Bonds. 
According to Ms. Sarah Hollenbeck in the Mayor's Office 
of Public Finance, the existing bonds have an aggregate 
interest rate of 7.293 percent and were issued with a 20 
year term, with a final payment date of December 1, 2008. 
According to Ms. Hollenbeck, the proposed bonds would 
have an estimated aggregate interest rate of 4.49 percent 
and would have a 10 year term with a final payment date 
of December 1, 2008. According to the proposed 
resolution, the maximum interest rate of any one 
maturity of the proposed bonds is 12 percent. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Ms. Hollenbeck estimates that this proposed refinancing 
of the 1988 Bonds will result in a total net present value 
savings in aggregate debt service ranging from $482,000 
to $511,000, over the remaining ten year term of the 
bonds, depending on whether the Reserve Fund 
Requirement is met with cash or a Surety Policy (see 
Comment No. 1). 

In addition to authorizing the issuance of refunding 
bonds, this subject resolution approves a new lease 
between the Parking Authority, as lessor, and the City, as 
lessee, of the Moscone Center Garage. Like the 1988 
bonds, these subject refunding bonds would be secured 
primarily by base rental payments to be paid by the City, 
from Parking Revenue Fund monies 1 , to the Parking 
Authority. The lease between the City and the Parking 
Authority would begin on the closing date of the bond 
sale, estimated to be November 19, 1998, and end on the 
earliest of a) December 1, 2008, or b) such earlier date as 
the outstanding bonds have been redeemed and all other 
amounts due have been paid or provision for their 
payment has been made, or c) the date of termination of 
the lease due to casualty or condemnation, in accordance 
with the terms of the lease. 

The lease between the Parking Authority, as lessee, and 
the City, as lessor, contains an indemnification clause as 
follows: "To the extent permitted by law the City hereby 
agrees to indemnify and hold the Authority and its 
officers, directors and employees harmless against any 
and all liabilities (other than the negligence or willful 
misconduct of the Authority and its officers, directors and 
employees) that might arise out of or are related to the 
Project or any portion thereof (including, without 
limitation, arising out of any use, storage, release, 
presence or disposal of Hazardous Substances on or about 
the Project) and the Bonds, the City further agrees to 
defend the Authority and its directors in any action 
arising out of or related to the Project and the Bonds. The 



1 Rental payments for the Moscone Center Garage are paid from the Parking Revenue Fund, which 
is a subfund of the General Fund. Ms. Hollenbeck reports that the Moscone Center Garage is 
projected to generate sufficient revenue to the Parking Revenue Fund to pay the rent that would be 
due under the proposed refinancing and that additional General Fund monies would not contribute 
to the proposed rent payments. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
32 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

provisions of this Section 12 shall survive the termination 
of this Project Lease." 

Comments: 1. Ms. Hollenbeck reports that the principal that will be 

outstanding on the prior 1988 Bonds will be $7,250,000 on 
the date the 1988 Bonds are called, which is projected to 
be December 1, 1998. The prior 1988 Bonds have a cash 
Reserve Fund which has a current balance of 
approximately $1,005,125. The monies from the Reserve 
Fund would be released when the 1988 Bonds are 
defeased. 2 According to Ms. Hollenbeck, approximately 
$708,000 of the liquidated $1,005,125 would be used to 
fund a new cash Reserve Fund for the proposed refunding 
bonds. 

As an alternative to establishing a new Reserve Fund, the 
Mayor's Office of Public Finance is awaiting bids from 
bond insurers to obtain a Surety Policy for the proposed 
refunding bonds, which is similar to an insurance policy 
and is used in lieu of a Reserve Fund. A Surety Policy on 
the Moscone Center Garage refunding bonds would cost 
approximately 4 percent of the amount of the Reserve 
Fund requirement, or $28,320, which would be funded 
from the liquidated $1,005,125 Reserve Fund on the 1988 
Bonds. 

As of the writing of this report, the Mayor's Office of 
Public Finance has not yet received bids from bond 
insurers and is unable to determine whether the Reserve 
Fund requirement will be met with cash or the acquisition 
of a Surety Policy. With either a cash-funded Reserve 
Fund or a Surety Policy, the remainder of the existing 
$1,005,125 Reserve Fund monies would be expended 
toward the cost of issuance of the proposed new refunding 
bonds and toward the redemption of the current bonds, 
with the balance released to the Parking Authority for 
capital projects. 

2. Ms. Hollenbeck notes that these subject refunding 
bonds, issued in an amount not to exceed $8,250,000, 
would be tax exempt bonds. The exact amount of the bond 



2 Defeasance is the term used to describe the termination of all rights and interests of the 
bondholders upon final payment of all debt service, in the manner required by the terms and 
conditions of the bond resolution. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



issuance will not be known until the date of the 
competitive sale, as the interest rate will affect the 
aggregate principal amount needed to fund the refunding 
escrow account (see Comment No. 3), cost of issuance, 
bond insurance, and either a cash Reserve Fund or a 
Surety Policy. 

3. According to the Mayor's Office of Public Finance, the 
subject refunding bonds must be sold in advance of 
defeasing the 1988 Bonds. Ms. Hollenbeck reports that 
proceeds from the sale of the subject refunding bonds will 
most likely be invested in Treasury securities which will 
mature on December 1, 1998, at which time the 1988 
Bonds will be defeased. The price of the Treasury 
securities purchased, which will fund an escrow fund 
created to defease the 1988 Bonds, will not be known until 
such securities are purchased and may also affect the par 
amount of the refunding bonds issued. 

4. In accordance with this subject resolution, the cost of 
issuance of the refunding bonds are not to exceed 
$350,000 and are to be paid with bond proceeds and/or the 
available cash which had funded the Reserve Fund for the 
1988 bonds. 

5. This subject resolution also ratifies previous actions 
taken in connection with the proposed refunding bonds, 
authorizes taking future actions in connection with the 
refunding bonds, and approves the form of several 
documents to be executed in connection with this subject 
refunding, including 1) a Continuing Disclosure 
Certificate, 2) an Official Statement, and 3) as noted 
above, the lease between the City and the Parking 
Authority for the Moscone Center Garage. 

6. According to Ms. Theresa Alvarez of the City 
Attorney's Office, the indemnification clause in the lease 
between the City and the Parking Authority is the 
standard clause included in other previously approved 
City leases with public entities. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 5 - File 98-1560 



Department: 
Item: 



Amount: 
Description: 



Mayor's Office of Housing (MOH) 

Resolution authorizing the issuance and delivery of 
Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds, Series 1998A and 
Series 1998B, in an aggregate principal amount not to 
exceed $2,500,000 for the purpose of refunding bonds 
previously issued to provide financing for a multifamily 
rental housing project, authorizing the sale of the bonds, 
approving the form of and authorizing the execution of an 
indenture providing the terms and conditions of the 
bonds, approving the form of and authorizing the 
execution of the bond placement agreement providing the 
terms and conditions for the sale of the bonds, approving 
the form of and authorizing the execution of an 
amendment to the financing and regulatory agreement, 
approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a 
loan agreement, approving the form of and authorizing 
the preparation and distribution of a preliminary official 
statement relating to the bonds, approving the form of 
and authorizing the execution and distribution of an 
official statement relating to the bonds, approving the 
form of and authorizing the execution of a subordination 
-agreement, approving and authorizing the execution and 
delivery of any document necessary to implement this 
resolution, ratifying and approving any action heretofore 
taken in connection with the bonds, the project and the 
refunding of the prior bonds, and related matters. 

Not to exceed $2,500,000 

In 1985, the City financed the construction of an 82-unit 
multifamily rental housing development known as Aspen 
South Hills Apartments Project (Project), located on 
approximately 5.6 acres south of Kiska Street and east 
and west of Reardon Road in the Hunters Point area, with 
the issuance of $2,600,000 in Multifamily Housing 
Revenue Bonds, and made a loan of the proceeds to the 
Aspen South Hills Apartments Company, a California 
Limited Partnership. The current outstanding debt on the 
prior 1985 Bonds will be $2,410,000 as of December 1, 
1998. The property is owned by the Housing Authority, 
and was leased to Aspen South Hills Apartments 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Company in 1984 for 75 years to operate low income 
housing. Aspen South Hills is a 100 percent affordable 
housing development project. 

Approval of this proposed resolution would authorize the 
issuance of refunding bonds, in an amount not to exceed 
$2,500,000, to refinance the prior 1985 Bonds. According 
to Mr. Joe LaTorre of the Mayor's Office of Housing 
(MOH), only $2,330,000 is expected to be issued in the 
subject refunding bonds, but the final bond amount may 
change depending on the interest rate assigned on the day 
of the bond sale. 

Mr. LaTorre reports that of the $2,330,000 total, an 
estimated $2,270,000 will be issued in tax exempt bonds 
and approximately $60,000 will be issued in taxable 
bonds. The interest rate on the existing tax exempt bonds 
is 9 percent. The proposed tax exempt bonds, if issued at 
this time, would have an estimated interest rate of 6 
percent (see Comment No. 1). The taxable bonds are 
expected to have an interest rate of approximately 6 
percent, also. Mr. LaTorre estimates that the proposed 
refunding of the 1985 bonds would result in a net present 
value savings in bonded indebtedness of $918,395 over 
the remaining 28 year term of the bonds. The Attachment 
to this report, provided by Mr. LaTorre includes a 
description of such estimated savings. 

Additionally, the Federal National Mortgage Association 
(Fannie Mae) will, through a Collateral Agreement with 
the Trustee, provide a guarantee of payment of principal 
and interest on the subject refunding bonds, which will 
remain in place for the Life of the bonds. As a result, the 
Reserve Fund for the current outstanding bonds will be 
released after defeasing 1 the current outstanding bonds, 
since the guarantee will be provided by Fannie Mae on 
the proposed refunding bonds. The Reserve Fund 
currently totals $455,000, of which $200,000 will be 
expended by the owner to fund deferred maintenance on 
the Aspen South Hills Project. The remaining $255,000 
($455,000 less $200,000) will be applied to (a) defeasing 



1 Defeasance is the term used to describe the termination of all rights and interests of the 
bondholders upon final payment of all debt sen-ice, in the manner required by the terms and 
conditions of the bond resolution. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

the current bonds, (b) establishing a new Reserve Fund, 
and (c) partial payment of the cost of issuance. The total 
estimated cost of the bond issuance is $186,000 according 
to Mr. LaTorre. 

Comments: 1. Neither the interest rate nor the final bond amount 

will be able to be set until the bonds are priced 
immediately before closing. According to Ms. Theresa 
Alvarez in the City Attorney's Office, preliminary 
estimates indicate that approximately $2,270,000 of the 
subject Refunding Bonds would qualify as tax exempt. 
This subject resolution states that the tax exempt bonds 
must be issued at an interest rate below 7.75 percent. As 
noted above, the MOH advises that if the bonds were 
issued at this time, the tax exempt bonds would have an 
estimated interest rate of 6 percent. 

2. Ms. Alvarez reports that with the subject resolution to 
issue refunding bonds, which is a conduit financing for a 
private developer, applicable tax laws necessitate that 
some issuance costs be funded by a source outside of the 
tax-exempt bonds issuance, such as taxable bonds. Hence, 
an estimated $60,000 of taxable bonds will be issued and 
the proceeds will partially fund the estimated $186,000 

" cost of the issuance of all of the bonds. This subject 
resolution states that the taxable bonds must have an 
interest rate which would not exceed 8 percent. The MOH 
estimates that the taxable bonds will have an interest 
rate of approximately 6 percent. 

3. According to Mr. LaTorre, for bond issuances of under 
$10 million, competitive sale of bonds is rarely practical. 
As such, Mr. LaTorre reports that the City and Aspen 
South Hills Apartment Company, the developer, have 
negotiated a private placement of the bonds with Bank of 
America Community Development Bank, which would 
purchase the bonds on behalf of Bank of America Federal 
Savings Bank. 

4. Debt on the prior 1985 Bonds is serviced every six 
months, with the next payment due on December 1, 1998. 
Mr. LaTorre reports that in order to defease the prior 
bonds on December 1, 1998, this subject resolution must 
be approved by the Finance Committee, adopted by the 
full Board of Supervisors, signed by the Mayor and the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

37 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



transaction closed prior to October 31, 1998 in order to 
give the bondholders the mandatory 30-day notice of 
redemption. According to Mr. LaTorre, if the City does not 
meet these deadlines, retirement of the prior 1985 Bonds 
and issuance of the subject Refunding Bonds would have 
to wait until June 1999, which would result in an 
estimated $12,000 in additional interest costs at current 
interest rates and would subject the future refunding to 
uncertainty about interest rates. 

5. The prior 1985 Bonds were issued with a 40 year term, 
with a final payment date of December 1, 2026. Mr. 
LaTorre notes that the MOH also has a 40 year 
agreement with the developer to maintain affordability 
standards, which will expire in 2026. As such, MOH plans 
to issue the tax exempt Refunding Bonds with a 28 year 
term, with a final payment date of December 1, 2026. The 
taxable bonds will mature on December 1, 2000. 

6. This subject resolution also ratifies previous actions 
taken in connection with the proposed refunding bonds, 
authorizes taking future actions in connection with the 
refunding bonds, and approves the form of several 
documents to be executed in connection with this subject 
refinancing, including (a) an Indenture providing the 
terms and conditions of the bonds, (b) the Bond Placement 
Agreement, (c) the loan agreement between the City and 
the developer, (d) an Official Statement, and (e) a 
Subordination Agreement. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

38 



10/01/98 THU 15=36 M 415 252 3140 
iu/91/98 MON 17:59 FAX 415 421 &SJ0 



MAYOR - HUUSlWj 



Attachment 



City and County of San Francisco 

Mulirtamliy Housing Revenue Bond*, Sense 1SB5 
(FH A Insured Mortoage Loan / Aspen - South HBIb Apartments Project) 

flg/unrtno Qoto Se/vfce SflWnos 



Existing Baut Service 




Refunding 


Dam 










6.00% 


Debt 


Debt 


Service 




625% 




Principal 


Inleresr 


Service 


8orvice 


Savirvps 


PV 


Savings 


toffiam 






BfiM 


10.000 


110.700 


120,700 


101.647 


18,053 


12 


16272 


12/1/99 


10,000 


110,250 


120,250 


68,440 


31.610 


22 


29.743 


6/1/00 


10.000 


106,600 


119,800 


B2.B50 


36.850 


3.2 


33,602 


12/1/00 


10,000 


103 .350 


118.350 


87,408 


31,943 


42 


28,084 


6/1/01 


10,000 


108,900 


116,900 


66,618 


32,oaa 


52 


27253 


12/1/01 


10,000 


108.450 


115.460 


86.228 


&.za 


62 


26,639 


6/1/02 


15.000 


108.000 


125,000 


65,638 


37.3G3 


72 


26.853 


12/1/02 


10,000 


107.325 


117.325 


65.046 


32278 


6.2 


25,052 


6/1 /OS 


16.000 


106,875 


121.675 


89,428 


32,416 


82 


24.437 


12/V03 


10.000 


105,200 


118,200 


63.720 


32,460 


102 


23,742 


an/04 


16,000 


105.750 


120.750 


68,130 


32,620 


112 


23.122 


12/1/04 


15.000 


105,075 


120,075 


87283 


32.683 


122 


22,465 


6/1/05 


16.000 


104.400 


119,400 


81,665 


37,745 


132 


25.156 


12^1/05 


15.000 


103.725 


116,725 


91.065 


27.660 


142 


17277 


8/1/06 


20,000 


103.050 


123.060 


66.160 


37,870 


152 


23.735 


12/1/06 


20.000 


102,150 


122,150 


B4.443 
83,705 


37,708 

32.645 


162 
172 


22,917 


6/1/07 


20.090 


101,250 


121.2S0 


19.160 


12/1/07 


20.000 


100,350 


120.350 


87,820 


32.530 


182 


16,590 


6/1/06 


20,000 


96,450 


119,450 


86,935 


32.613 


182 


18,016 


12/1/08 


20.000 


96.550 


116,330 


86,060 


32,500 


202 


17,464 


a/i/o» 


25,000 


97,650 


122.650 


05.165 


37.4BS 


21.2 


19.5S3 


12/1/09 


20,000 


96,525 


116.625 


69,280 


27245 


??? 


13,767 


6/1/10 


25 -OOC 


B5,62S 


120.625 


86,248 


322-78 


232 


15.864 


12/1/10 


25,000 


84.530 


119,500 


B721S 


32285 


242 


15.340 


6/1/11 


30,000 


93,375 


123,378 


66.183 


37,183 


252 


17,138 


12/1/11 


25,000 


92,028 


117,025 


90,180 


26,875 


262 


12.007 


6/1/12 


30,000 


90,800 


120.900 


83270 


36,930 


272 


15.899 


12/1/12 


30.000 


69.550 


118,350 


67,938 


31,613 


282 


13,281 


6/1/13 


35,000 


88,200 


123200 


91.758 


31.443 


262 


12,809 


12/1/11 


35.000 


86,625 


121,625 


85/430 


38,195 


302 


14,286 


6/1/14 


35,000 


85,050 


120.050 


69.250 


30.800 


312 


11.788 


12/1/14 


35,000 


83,475 


116,476 


87.823 


30,533 


322 


11249 


6/1 /IS 


40.000 


B1,900 


121.900 


8*. .39! 


30.305 


332 


10,916 


12/1/15 


40,000 


80.100 


120,100 


65.120 


3<,aaa 


34.2 


12.218 


6/1/16 


40.OOO 


78,300 


118.300 


86,793 


28.508 


352 


9.B94 


12/1/16 


45.000 


76,500 


121,500 


92,318 


28,183 


362 


S.563 


6/1/17 


50.000 


74.475 


1Z4.47S 


65.605 


38.780 


372 


12.351 


12/1/17 


46,000 


72,225 


117.225 


66,220 


28,005 


S62 


8.648 


6/1/18 


55,000 


70.200 


126,200 


82.596 


32,603 


392 


9,764 


12/1/18 


50,000 


67.725 


117.725 


90.028 


26.898 


402 


7,611 


6/1/19 


55,000 


&S.475 


120,475 


69.058 


31.416 


412 


6,647 


12/1/18 


60,000 


63.000 


123,000 


87.2BB 


36.713 


422 


9.752 


an/20 


60.000 


60,300 


120,300 


8G.S1B 


29,783 


432 


7,868 


12/1/20 


66,000 


57.600 


122.600 


93.600 


29.000 


442 


7.446 


8/1/21 


70.000 


64,676 


124,675 


■1,833 


33,140 


452 


6,251 


12/1/21 


70,000 


51.525 


121.626 


69,470 


32,055 


462 


7.739 


B/l/22 


70.000 


46,376 


118275 


82^*05 


25,970 


472 


6,080 


12/1/22 


60,000 


45.225 


125.225 


90.193 


35,033 


482 


7,tS3 


6/1/23 


ao.ooo 


41.625 


121,623 


92,880 


26,645 


492 


6206 


12/1/23 


84.000 


96,025 


123,025 


80,620 


32,405 


sac 


6,916 


6/1/24 


80,000 


34.200 


124.200 


93260 


30.940 


61 .» 


6.405 


12/1/24 


40.000 


30,1 SO 


70,150 


80,753 


•20.603 


522 


-4,136 


6/1/25 


150,000 


28,350 


178,360 


83245 


85.105 


532 


16.568 


12/1/ZS 


100,000 


21.500 


121.600 


20,590 


101,010 


542 


19.060 


6/1/26 


65,000 


17,100 


102,100 





102,100 


552 


16,688 


12/1/26 


2P5.000 


13,275 


303. £75 
6.835,026 





308.Z76 
2216,213 


562 


S4.71S 




4.718,812 






[ PV MWtns* 


818.385 



1985 bonds 53BSSS 2y4l0.ooo 

PVauvlnB* divided by 1986 borwto outstanding 36.11% 



39 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 6 • File 98-1442 

Item: Ordinance amending Part I of the San Francisco Administrative 

Code by adding Chapter 21C, to require adjustments to bids or 
proposals for the purpose of evaluating contracts for the purchase of 
commodities in order to reflect Sales Tax revenues which would be 
realized by the City, the San Francisco Unified School District 
(SFUSD), the San Francisco Community College District (SFCCD), 
and the San Francisco Transportation Authority, and Business Tax 
revenues that would be realized by the City as the result of the 
procurement of commodities from a San Francisco-based vendor. 

Description: In evaluating the price of a bid or proposal for contracts to sell 
commodities to City Departments, City Departments are not 
currently authorized to take into account the local tax benefits, such 
as direct Sales Tax revenue paid to the City, the SFUSD, the SFCCD 
and the San Francisco Transportation Authority and Business Tax 
revenue paid to the City, generated by such purchase. For purposes 
of this legislation, a contract is defined as "an agreement for the 
purchase of commodities, including an agreement for services which 
includes the purchase of commodities, at the expense of the City, 
with an estimated values of commodities in excess of $1,000, where 
any part of the transaction would be subject to Sales Tax." 

The proposed ordinance would require City contract awarding 
authorities (but not the SFUSD, the SFCCD or the Transportation 
Authority) to take into account local tax benefits in evaluating the 
price of commodities being sold to the City. Specifically, each bid or 
proposal that includes consideration of price would be evaluated to 
determine whether a purchase from a potential vendor would 
generate Sales and Business Tax revenues for the City, for the 
SFUSD, the SFCCD and the Transportation Authority. 

Existing procurement procedures, as defined in the Administrative 
Code, generally requires City Departments to procure commodities 
through competitive solicitation, and may include award to the 
lowest bidder, or may otherwise take price into consideration. The 
proposed ordinance would additionally require City Departments to 
take into consideration the local tax benefits when evaluating the low 
bids. Specifically, each bid or proposal that requires consideration of 
price would be evaluated to determine whether a purchase from the 
bidder would generate Sales and Business Tax revenue for the City 
and Sales Tax revenue for the SFUSD, the SFCCD, or the San 
Francisco Transportation Authority. In such an event, for the 

board of supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

40 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

purpose of comparing the prices of bids or proposals, and for the 
purpose of determining the low bid, each bid would be reduced by the 
amount of Sales Tax and Business Tax revenue that would be paid to 
the City and the Sales Tax revenue that would be paid to the 
SFUSD, SFCCD, or the Transportation Authority. 

For example, Sales Tax collections that originate from within the 
City of San Francisco, based on the current Sales Tax rate of 8.5 
percent, are distributed in the following manner: 

Composition of Sales Tax Rate 
State 
State - General Fund 5.00% 

State - Health and Welfare (Realignment) 0.50% 

State - Public Safety 1 0.50% 

Subtotal - State 6.00% 

Bay Area Rapid Transit District 0.50% 

Indirect City Sales Tax Revenue 

Muni TDA 2 Funds 0.25% 

Direct Citv/Countv. SFUSD. SFCCD and 
Transportation Authority Revenue 
City General Fund 1.00% 

SF Transportation Authority 0.50% 

Schools Public Financing Authority 

(SFUSD, SFCCD) 0.25% 

Subtotal - City/County, SFUSD, SFCCD and 

Transportation Authority 1.75% 

Total Sales Tax Rate 8.50% 

Sales Taxes on purchases from a non-San Francisco-based vendor are 
assessed at the "point of sale", which is the location of the vendor's 



1 State - Public Safety (0.50%) Sales Tax proceeds are pooled by the State and allocated to California 
Cities and Counties for the purpose of supporting the cost of additional public safety programs, such 
as Police services and Fire protection. 

2 Transit Development Act (TDA) funding allocated directly to the Municipal Railway operating 
budget through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 
41 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

sales office, and the City would not receive the benefit of its share of 
the Sales Tax revenue. 

As can be seen from the table on the previous page, revenues 
produced by 1.75 percent of the 8.5 percent Sales Tax rate are 
allocated directly, in relation to the dollar volume of sales made to the 
City, the SFUSD, the SFCCD and the San Francisco Transportation 
Authority. Therefore, if the City were to select a San Francisco-based 
vendor for a purchase of $10,000 in goods or services which require 
the payment of Sales Taxes, the total Sales Taxes paid on that 
purchase would amount to $850 (8.5 percent of $10,000). Of the total 
Sales Tax of $850, a total of $175 (1.75 percent of $10,000) would 
directly benefit the City, the SFUSD, the SFCCD and the 
Transportation Authority. The General Fund would receive one 
percent or $100. The Transportation Authority would receive 0.5 
percent or $50. The Schools Financing Authority (the SFUSD and 
SFCCD) would receive 0.25 percent or $25. 

Under this proposed ordinance, the $175 in Sales Tax proceeds that 
would benefit the City, the SFCCD, the SFUSD and the San 
Francisco Transportation Authority would be deducted from the 
bidder's bid or proposal price for purposes of determining the low bid 
and evaluating the price of the commodity being purchased against 
competing bids or proposals. 

With regard to Business Taxes, San Francisco businesses must pay 
the higher of the computed Employee Payroll Tax liability or the 
Gross Receipts Tax liability, if such liability is more than $2,500 
annually. In general, the Employee Payroll Tax is computed as 1.5 
percent of a business' payroll and the Gross Receipts Tax varies 
between 0.123 to 0.3 percent of Gross Receipts for most businesses. 

Since the Employee Payroll Tax cannot be directly linked to the 
amount of a sale, it cannot be used to adjust the prices of bids or 
proposals to reflect the City's tax benefit. Therefore, this proposed 
ordinance includes a price adjustment based on the amount of the 
Gross Receipts Tax the bidder would pay, regardless of whether the 
bidder actually pays the Employee Payroll Tax or the Gross Receipts 
Tax. 

Comments: 1. As shown in the table on the previous page, the City, the San 
Francisco Transportation Authority and the Schools Public Financing 
Authority (SFUSD and SFCCD) benefit directly from 1.75 percent of 
the 8.5 percent Sales Tax rate for sales made in San Francisco. 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

42 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Indirect allocations of Sales Tax revenue for Public Safety, Muni 
Transit Development Act (TDA) revenue and Health and Welfare 
("Realignment") Sales Tax revenue are also made by the State to the 
City. However, such indirect allocations are not based on the actual 
Sales Tax collections resulting from sales within the City. The 
proposed ordinance should therefore be amended to insert the word 
"direct" before every mention of "Sales Tax" revenue. 

2. In the professional judgement of the Budget Analyst, the proposed 
ordinance would not result in additional costs to the City. Any price 
adjustment which reduces the bid price to reflect the amount of the 
Sales Taxes and Business Taxes generated and that results in the 
City paying more than the low bid for commodities from a San 
Francisco-based vendor would be offset by the increased Sales Tax 
revenue and Business Tax revenue which would not be realized if the 
purchase were made from a vendor located outside of San Francisco. 
With respect to the Sales Tax, such revenue would not accrue to the 
City, the SFUSD, the SFCCD and the Transportation Authority if the 
purchase were made from a vendor located outside of San Francisco. If 
the vendor does not have a place of business or employees in San 
Francisco, the vendor would likewise not be subject to the City's 
Business Tax. 

3. Mr. Bill Jones, Supervising Purchaser of the Purchasing 
Department, informs the Budget Analyst that administration of the 
proposed ordinance would require the one-time development of 
revised purchasing procedures. Such revised procedures would 
instruct the Purchasing Department's buyers and City Departments 
as to the proper method of granting price adjustments to bids and 
proposals for the purchase of commodities to reflect the Sales Taxes 
and Business Taxes which will be realized by the City. In developing 
such procedures, the Purchasing Department would request 
assistance from the Controller in order to assure that price 
adjustments accurately reflected the tax benefits to the City, the 
SFUSD, the SFCCD and the San Francisco Transportation Authority. 
However, according to Mr. Jones, no additional increased 
administrative costs are anticipated as a result of this proposed 
ordinance. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed ordinance by inserting the word "direct" before 
every mention of "Sales Tax" in accordance with Comment 1. 

Approval of the proposed ordinance, as amended, is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

43 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 7 - File 98-1557 

Department: Administrative Services - County Clerk 
Assessor-Recorder 



Item: 



Description: 



Ordinance amending Chapter 8 of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code by repealing Section 8.33, which sets certain 
fees for the Office of the County Clerk-Recorder, and adding 
Section 8.33.1, to set certain fees for the Office of the County 
Clerk, and Section 8.33.2 to set certain fees for the Office of the 
County Assessor-Recorder. 

Administrative Code Section 8.33 presently sets certain fees for 
the Office of the County Clerk-Recorder. However, the 1996 
Charter separated the County Recorder function from the County 
Clerk-Recorder and merged the Recorder with the Assessor's 
Office. This proposed ordinance would repeal Section 8.33 of the 
Administrative Code and create two new sections; Section 8.33.1 
(County Clerk's Fees) and Section 8.33.2 (County Assessor- 
Recorder's Fees). 

The County Clerk charges many fees that are authorized by State 
Codes, and such fees are not included in the City's Administrative 
Code. However, if the County Clerk determines that fee levels 
specified in the State Code are insufficient to cover the County 
Clerks costs, an amendment to the City's Administrative Code is 
proposed to add the specific fee and the increased fee levels. 

The Attachment to this report provides a table that contains a) the 
existing County Clerk's fees under Section 8.33 of the 
Administrative Code which is to be repealed; b) the same County 
Clerk fees under new Section 8.33.1; c) County Clerk fees which 
are being added under new Section 8.33.1; and, d) County 
Assessor- Recorder fees which were formerly under Section 8.33 but 
are now under new Section 8.33.2. 

The County Clerk has recently conducted an internal audit of its 
actual costs, using a methodology developed by a consultant for a 
similar study in 1994. Most such fees have not changed, with the 
following exceptions: 

• The County Clerk fee covering the cost of issuing a duplicate 
marriage license is increased from $5 to $10. This fee has been 
charged by the County Clerk for many years at the State 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

specified $5 level, but has never been included in the 
Administrative Code. 

• The proposed ordinance decreases one County Clerk fee for 
provision of copies of records on file from $.50 per page (after 
the first three pages) to $.10 per page (after the first three 
pages). 

• The proposed ordinance would authorize the County Clerk to 
charge two new fees for new State mandated duties: 

- $7.00 fee for the processing of fingerprint cards for process 
servers; 

- $10.00 fee for the cost of issuing identification cards for 
process servers. 

The $10 fee for identification cards for process servers has 
been charged by the County Clerk since the State mandated 
that the County Clerk assume these responsibilities as of 
January' 1, 1998. 

• Fees for the cost of supplying information about fictitious 
business name statements on computer diskette ($1.00 for the 
diskette, $9.50 for records of one day or one week, $20.00 for 
records of two weeks or one month, $10.00 for the optional 
handling of delivery service, and $15.00 for processing a first 
time order - "new client fee"). According to Deputy City 
Attorney Mario Kashou, these fees are in conformance with 
the Sunshine Ordinance which requires each department to 
provide data in its possession in electronic form if so requested. 

Comment: 1. According the Ms. Nancy Alfaro, County Clerk, the fees for 

issuing identification cards for process servers have been charged 
since January 1, 1998 when the State mandated that the County 
Clerk assume that responsibility. Also, fees for the provision of 
fictitious business name statements on computer diskette have 
been charged since 1993, without Board of Supervisors approval 
of an ordinance amending the Administrative Code. Therefore, 
the proposed ordinance should be amended to provide for 
retroactivity. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. The fee revenues and related fees listed in the Attachment to 
our report are reflected in the FY 1998-99 budget as follows: 

County Clerk Fees $1,293,000 

(Administrative Services Budget) 

County Assessor-Recorder's Fees $893,000 

(Assessor-Recorders Budget) 

According to Ms. Alfaro the fees shown on the Attachment are 
expected to generate the same amount of revenues in FY 1998-99 
as has been approved in the County Clerk's FY 1998-99 budget. 
The increased fee for a duplicate marriage license (from $5 to $10) 
and the new fee for fingerprint cards for process servers ($7) is 
expected to offset any revenue reduction due to the decrease in the 
fee for the provision of copies of records on file (from $.50 per page 
after the first three pages to $.10 per page after the first three 
pages). Revenue from the fees for identification cards for process 
servers and provision of fictitious business name statements on 
computer diskettes is expected to remain the same because, as 
noted above, the County Clerk is already charging fees for this 
purpose. 

According to Mr. Greg Diaz, Chief Deputy Recorder, since the 
Assessor-Recorder's fees are not changing, the fees shown on the 
Attachment are expected to generate the same amount of 
revenues in FY 1998-99 as has been approved in the Assessor- 
Recorder's FY 1998-99 budget. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 7, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed ordinance to provide for retroactivity. 

2. Because the proposed ordinance would amend the 
Administrative Code to conform to the 1996 Charter, which 
transferred the Recorder function from the County Clerk to the 
Assessor's Office, and some fees are adjusted to reflect the City's 
actual costs, the Budget Analyst recommends that the proposed 
ordinance, as amended, be approved. 



arvey M. Rose 




Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 



Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

47 



Attachment 



%%9 


73 O O 
2 ° C 


O 



JO O > 

2 S c 


s 


3^ 




Man 
Filin 
Man 
Issua 
Filin; 




003 

3 3 r? 


S "2- "2. 


3 


2 "° s^ 

— • 3^ 


3' 


5' S- 






m ft s- 


o 1 


-1 ft 


00 


00 Q. 




UO 3 3- OO — - 




rming copies 
film of daily 
fiche (per fra 


:ates of Recorded m; 

(each additional p 
s of records or paper 
der staff, pages 1 thr 

(each additional p 


5' 
00 



"2 


ntication of public 

s of records or paper 

der staff, pages 1 thr 

(each additional p 


> 13 

Q. O 

& == 

g ft 

SO 
— 0) 

Z 3 

ii 

s ft 


■3 3 

< * 

EL 

ST w 

5' a 

<w g. 

2 o 

3 S 

« 

— 3 


> 
a 
g. 

0' 

3 

CJ 

3 


jge licenses ( 
confidential 
ige ceremoni 
ce of authori 
fictitious bus 




surcha 
film of 
me) 


GIB 

e 


3- 
B 


1 
3 


regular) 
maniage certifi 
es in City Hall 
ty to marry and 
iiness name stat 


O 
H 


ft ^2 
ft 

3, 


(D O CO tB JS 

00 C 00 ^ 

ft 00 3 cs 

w S s^ f 


00 


to O go 33 

w =* 5, EL 
^— ' ft 


C 
ft 

5' 


5" 3 

00 ft 

3 3. 

O w 

5 
•3 

13 


5' 

00 


ft 


13 [a 




13 


B 




ft 
3 § El 


n 




a oq 




ft 


*2, 


C 




ft 5* ^ 




1 




•1 


cr 




3 w 


r 
pi 


o_ 


13 ""^ 




13 




0' 








00 
a 




00 

« 




a- 
§ 






Cfl 




ft 




ft 




Q. 








a 




3. 










"51 




n 















P3 




< 

B_ 




< 

IB 










M 


















C/3 




o* 




er 














*< 




*< 




















































ft" 




ft" 


















11 














** 




*" 








to 




SJ 










N> hJ 




U Ui U -J Ov 




W Wi — 


O 1>J u> <-f> 


~- 


p u p 


vO >o 


00 -U 





<~n O -t>. VD 




boo 


Ln © bo 


b 


In b b 


b b 


b b 


b 


b b b b b 




000 


00 00 





00 











00000 





2 2 



ft 




n 




r> 


n 




n 










O O 








Si Si 






c/> 








O 


5* B 
Q 






M) 




3 




n 




B. 











a 












tf c 


— . 


p. 


Ul 










a Hi 


cro 


a 


3 


it 3 


B. 


3 


ai 










O 








c 






« 


y 


ta 


m 



K> t/< — O l*> 

b b b L« b 
00000 












c 






■a 

























B 




n 


ft 










M 






ft 


H 


0- 





*: 


9. 


3. 


> 




rt 


(A 


CJ 




</) 


— ' 


3 


w 




1/3 




■n 


1/3 


ft 




O 




55 


f 




H 


g 




CJ 


n 




O; 









pi 

en 

a 

pj 

C/i 

V) 
re 

S. 
O 
3 
00 

u> 
i*j 


Ul 


01 












O 





1 1 



31 TJ 
5. 3 



13 13 O 



o > 



3 21 ^ 



* R- 



- 3 q. a. o. a. 



0000 



S, o o o o 



ft ft I 
ft ft 



?????= o 



3Sl 

2 13 



3 a. o — 



3 I 

ft 3 

?t ° 

o S 

2 3. 





3 




13 


rr 




3 


5' 


5' 








ft 


rt 




ft 






n 






w 


3 


> 


2 




3 




3 

















B 


00 






0' 


EL 




< 




3 

< 


ft" 

3 


B> 
O 


ft 
O 


o" 




O 
[J 
5' 


■is 


n 


O 


a. 


a. 





CJ 




DQ 


C 


ro 




a. 






3 










3 







"3 




CJ 






00 




3 


3 
Si 


2 


3 
a 




3 


ft 


a- 




3 s s 





& 5' 




w 


3" 


5" 


re 


& 


► 


3 


c 


00 


3 



S. c 



— — M M 

O c-f» n- O O "O vO 

b b b b 6 in In 
0000000 



— o 
b — 



00 "< 



3 > si 

o < a n 

* s. q. a o 3 s 

3 5? o. *** ° 









rt 


B 


B 





a" 
B 


O 
2. 


3 


B" 


3 


| 


ft 










(ro 


3 


3 


Q 



3 § 



00 


Sj 


Si 



O 

3 


O. 








O 


I 


B 


a 


cr 
c 


ET 




ft 


3 


3 




h 



II i 

si.* 

3 2 T3 



0000 
0000 



000000 
000000 



S 








c 








3 O" 








Si s: 








D. ° 








'A 3 
















£ 3. 








8 <5 






S 


S, 2, 


( ) 




SB 







Q 


3 S 
s 


^ 






I. 

B 

00 


s 




i 


ft 

0' 
ft 

3 


n 
w 






ft 








in 




K 




9 




B 




w 




a 




(A 




Or 












r/i 








S 

rr 




ha 
























=i. 




;., 








LO 




Uj 
















►^1 










Vt 








^1 








^ VO 



























48 




City and County of£an Francisco 
Meeting Minutes - DRAFT 
Special finance Committee 

Members: Supervisors Michael Yaki, Leslie Katz, Mark Leno 
Clerk: Gail Johnson 



Veterans Building 

401 Van Ness Avenue, 

Room 308 

San Francisco, CA 

94102-4532 



Wednesday, October 14, 1998 



10:00 AM 



Veterans Building, Legislative Chamber 

401 Van Ness Ave., Room 404 

San Francisco, CA 94102 



Special Meeting 



Members Present: Michael Yaki, Leslie Katz, Mark Leno. 



981427 [CEQA Findings] Supervisor Yaki 

Resolution adopting environmental findings (and a statement of overriding considerations) pursuant to the 
California Environmental Quality Act and State Guidelines in connection with adoption of the Mission Bay 
North and Mission Bay South Redevelopment Plans and various other actions necessary to implement such 
plans. 

8/24/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Economic Development, Transportation, and Technology 
Committee, expires on 9/23/1998. 

9/14/98, SUBSTITUTED. 

9/14/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Economic Development, Transportation, and Technology 
Committee, expires on 10/14/1998. 

10/7/98, TRANSFERRED to Finance Committee. A specially constituted Finance Committee, consisting of 
Supervisors Yaki, Katz and Leno. 

Heard in Committee. 

Amendment of the Whole presented by Supervisor Yaki. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. 



RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Yaki, Katz, Leno 



DOCUMENTS D*PT. 

OCT 2 1 1998 

SAN F J 

BLlC Lit 



PUE 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 12:38 PM on 10/19/98 



Special Finance Committee Wetting Minutes (Ictoher 14, 1998 

•J81432 |Mission Bay North Tax Allocation Agreement] Supervisor Yaki 

Resolution approving and authorizing a tax incrcmi.nl allocation pledge agreement between the City and 
County of San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco, concerning 
the pledge of net available tax increment from the Mission Bay North Plan Area tor the purpose of financing 
public infrastructure in furtherance of the implementation of the Redevelopment Plan for the Mission Ba) 
North project and for development of affordable housing in the Mission Bay North and South Plan Areas. 
authorizing and approving the incurrence of bonded indebtedness by the Redevelopment Agency not to exceed 
$190,000,000 for such purposes; approving the use of available housing increment produced in the Mission 
Bay North Plan Area for the development of affordable housing on parcels to be contributed to the 
Redevelopment Agency; adopting findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and 
adopting findings that the agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan and tight Priority Policies of 
the Planning Code Section 101.1. 
(Fiscal impact) 

8/24/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY Rl I I to Economic Development. 1 ransportation. and Technology 
Committee, expires on 9/23/1998. 

9/14/98, SUBSTITUTED. 

9/14/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 3() D. \Y Rl I I to Economic Development, I ransportation. and Technology 
Committee, expires on 10/14/1998. 

10/7/98, TRANSFERRED to Finance Committee A special!) consistuted Finance ( Committee, consisting of 
Supervisors Yaki, Katz and Leno. 

Heard in Committee 

RECOMMENDED by the following v..u-: 
Ayes: 3 - Yaki, Katz, Leno 
981433 |Mission Bay South Tax Allocation Agreement | Supervisor Yaki 

Resolution approv ing and authorizing a tax increment allocation pledge agreement between the City and 
County of San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco, concerning 
the pledge of net available tax increment from the Mission Bav South Plan Area (or the purpose of financing 
public infrastructure in furtherance of the implementation of the Redevelopment Plan for the Mission Bay 
South project and for the development of affordable housing in the Mission Ba> North and South Plan Areas; 
authorizing and approving the incurrence of bonded indebtedness by the Redevelopment Agency not to exceed 
$450,000,000 for such purposes; approving the use of all available housing increment produced in the Mission 
Bay South Plan Area for the development of affordable housing on parcels to be contributed to the 
Redevelopment Agency; adopting findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and 
adopting findings that the agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan and Eight Priority Policies of 
the Planning Code Section 101.1. 
(Fiscal impact.) 

8/24/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Economic Development, Transportation, and Technology 
Committee, expires on 9 23 1998. 

9/14/98, SUBSTITUTED. 

9/14/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY Rl 1 I to Economic Development. Transportation, and Technology 

Committee, expires on 10/14/1998. 

10/7/98, TRANSFERRED to Finance Committee. A specially constituted Finance Committee, consisting of 

Supervisors Yaki, Katz and Leno. 

Heard in Committee 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Yaki, Katz, Leno 



City and County of San Francisco 2 Printed at 12:38 PM on Id 19*8 



Special Finance Committee Meeting Minutes October 14, 1998 

981434 [Land Donation Agreement. UCSF Campus] Supervisor Yaki 

Resolution approving and authorizing a land donation agreement between the City and County and the 
Regents of the University of California, for the contribution to the Regents, at no transfer price of 
approximately 1 1.89 acres of City-owned present and former street areas, for the development of a new UCSF 
expansion campus in Mission Bay South; adopting findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality 
Act; and adopting findings that the conveyance is consistent with the City's General Plan and Eight Priority 
Policies of the Planning Code Section 101.1. 
(Fiscal impact.) 

8/24/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Economic Development, Transportation, and Technology 
Committee, expires on 9/23/1998. 
9/14/98, SUBSTITUTED. 

9/14/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Economic Development, Transportation, and Technology 
Committee, expires on 10/14/1998. 

10/7/98, TRANSFERRED to Finance Committee. A specially constituted Finance Committee, consisting of 
Supervisors Yaki, Katz and Leno. 

Heard in Committee. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Yaki, Katz, Leno 
IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

Adjournment 



City and County of San Francisco 3 Printed at 12:38 PM on 10/19/98 



GOVERNMENT INFORMATION CENTER (2) 
MAIN LIBRARY - CIVIC CENTER 
100 Larkin Street 
DEPARTMENT 41 




9o-P^ 



/ 



City and County of San Francisco 

Meeting Agenda 

,,Finance Committee 

Members: Supervisors Mabel Teng, Barbara Kaufman, Gavin Newsom 
Clerk: Joni Blanchard 



Veterans Building 

401 Van Ness Avenue, 

Room 308 

San Francisco, CA 

94102-4532 



Wednesday, October 14, 1998 



1:00 PM 
Regular Meeting 



Veterans Building, 401 Van Ness Avenue, 

Room 410 



REGULAR AGENDA 



DOCU^.NTSDEPT. 

OCT 1 3 1998 



ti >i /<. 



llSGO 



«KK» 



981607 (Waiving Statue of Limitations] 

Resolution waiving the statute of limitations with respect to to payment of certain warrants of the 
City and County of San Francisco, in the amount of $1 1,514.07, a legal obligation of the City and 
County of San Francisco. (Payee, Robert C. Williams). (Controller) 

9/23/98, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance Committee. 



kte 



981641 [Waive Statute of Limitations, Mary Williams] 

Resolution waiving the statute of limitations with respect to payment of certain warrants of the City 
and County of San Francisco, in the amount of $7,863.32 a legal obligation of the City and County of 
San Francisco. (Controller) 

9/30/98. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance Committee. 



981528 (Benchmark/Performance Standards] 

Hearing to consider benchmark and performance standards for Municipal Railway. 
9/14/98, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance Committee. 



Supervisor Teng 



Adjournment 



IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

NOTE: Persons unable to attend the meeting may submit to the City; by the time the proceeding 
begins, written comments regarding the agenda items above. These comments will be made a part of 
the official public record and shall be brought to the attention of the Board ofSuper\'isors. Any 
written comments should be sent to Committee Clerk, Finance Committee. San Francisco Board of 
Supervisors, 401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308. San Francisco, California 94102 by 5:00 p.m. on the 
day prior to the hearing. Comments which cannot be delivered to the committee clerk by that time 
may be taken directly to the hearing at the location above. 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at >:1 'ft PM on It) " v,V 



Finance Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, October 14, 1998 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 

Rule 5 40 provides that when an ordinance or resolution is introduced which would CREA TE OR 
REVISE MAJOR CITY POLICY, the committee to which the legislation is assigned shall not consider 
the legislation until at least thirty days after the date of introduction The provisions of this rule shall 
not apply to the routine operations of the departments of the City or when a legal time limit controls 
the hearing timing In general, the rule shall not apply to hearings to consider subject matter when 
no legislation has been presented, nor shall the rule apply to resolutions which simply URGE action 
to be taken 



981508 | Living Wage Task Force| Supervisor Kaufman 

Resolution establishing an advisory task force to evaluate the impact of living wage proposals on San 
Francisco's economy, businesses, non-profit organizations and residents and setting forth the 
membership and duties of the task force (Living Wage Task Force). 

9/14/98, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance Committee, expires on 10/14/1998 
Watch future agendas for matters. 



City and County of San Francisco 2 Printed at S:2t P\f on I0~V8 



Finance Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, October 14, 1998 



Disability Access 



Both the Committee Room (Room 410) and the Chamber (Room 404) are wheelchair accessible. The closest 

accessible BART Station is Civic Center, four blocks from the Veterans Building. Accessible MUNI lines serving this 

location are: #42 Downtown Loop, the #71 Haight/Noriega, the F line to Market and Van Ness and the METRO 

stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, call 923- 

6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of the Veterans Building adjacent to Davies Hall and the War Memorial 

Complex. 

Assitive listening devices are available for use in the Meeting Room and the Board Chamber. A device can be 
borrowed prior to or during a meeting. Borrower identification is required and must be held by Room 308 staff. 

The following services are available on request 48 hours prior to the meeting or hearing: 

For American sign language interpreters or the use of a reader during a meeting, contact Violeta Mosuela at 
(415)554-7704. 

For a large print copy of an agenda, contact Moe Vazquez at (415) 554-4909. 

In order to assist the City's efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple 
chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be 
sensitive to various chemical based products. Please help the City to accommodate these individuals. 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, 
councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. The Sunshine Ordinance 
assures that deliberations are conducted before the peopleand that City operations are open to the people's review. For 
more information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code) 
or to report a violation of the ordinance, contact the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force at 554-4851. 



City and County of San Francisco 3 Printed at 5:26 P.\f on II) 'VS 



FINANCE COMMITTEE 

S.F. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

VETERANS BUILDING 

401 VAN NESS AVENUE. ROOM 308 

SAN FRANCISCO. CA 94102 

IMPORTANT HEARING NOTICE!!! 



Bill Lynch 

Govt Information Ctr 

41 Library 

100 I jr kin Street 



F 
7 



CITY AND COUNTY 




Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn, Dept. 41 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



^BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



October 9, 1998 
TO: finance Committee 

FROM: /y Budget Analyst ^et om ^t-vd^:»A5 £, r ^teV.A-] <>£■ • 
SUBJECT: October 14, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 1 -File 98-1607 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



D Or.i iMENTS DEPT. 

OCT 14 7998 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Controller's Office 

Resolution waiving the Statute of Limitations with 
respect to the payment of 63 warrants of the City and 
County of San Francisco, in the total amount of 
$11,514.07, a legal obligation of the City and County of 
San Francisco. 

According to Section 10.181 of the Administrative Code, a 
warrant issued by the City becomes void one year from 
the date issued. According to Section 10.182 of the 
Administrative Code, the payee of the warrant may 
present the warrant to the Controller for payment up to 
three years from the date that it was rendered invalid or 
four years from the original issue date, and the Controller 
is authorized to draw a new warrant in favor of the payee 
in the same amount as the original warrant. After that 
time period, when the Statute of Limitations has expired, 
the Controller may no longer pay such a warrant without 
first obtaining approval from the Board of Supervisors. 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 14, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



The proposed resolution would waive the statute of 
limitations and would authorize the Controller's Office to 
replace 63 warrants totaling $11,514.07 issued between 
April 4, 1995 and December 23, 1997 to Mr. Robert C. 
Williams, a current employee of the Recreation and Park 
Department. 

A list of the 63 warrants issued to Mr. Robert C. Williams 
is shown in the Attachment to this report. 

1. According to Mr. John Madden of the Controller's 
Office, the 63 warrants were previously issued to Mr. 
Robert C. Williams by the Recreation and Park 
Department. The Controller's Office reports that the 63 
warrants were never cashed and have been canceled by 
the Controller's Office. 



Recommendation: 



2. Mr. Madden advises that there are sufficient funds in 
the Warrants Account of the FY 1998-99 General City 
Responsibilities Budget to pay for the one new warrant in 
the amount of $11,514.07 that would be reissued to Mr. 
Williams by the Controller's Office. 

Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

2 







uais. 






Attacnment 


Payee 


Warrant No. 


Issued 


Amount 




01) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0111378 


04-04-95 


$ 


222.50 




02) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0136317 


04-18-95 


$ 


222.49 




03) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0161304 


05-02-95 


$ 


232.50 




04) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0186277 


05-16-95 


$ 


232.49 




05) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0214146 


05-30-95 


$ 


232.50 




06) Williams. Robert C. . 


517-0239014 


06-13-95 


$ 


198-57 




07) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0262918 


06-27-95 


$ 


23249 




08) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0286192 


07-11-95 


$ 


232.50 




09) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0310587 


07-25-95 


$ 


213.52 




10) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0335629 


08-08-95 


$ 


213.51 




11) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0358906 


08-22-95 


$ 


213.51 




12) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0383588 


09-05-95 


$ 


213.52 




13) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0410679 


09-19-95 


$ 


167.22 




14) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0440149 


10-03-95 


$ 


213.52 




15) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0462939 


10-17-95 


$ 


213.50 




16) Wiinams. Roberta 


517-0484894 


10-31-95 


$ 


167.24 


> 


17) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0506986 


11-14-95 


$ 


213.51 




18) Wiinams. Robert C. 


517-0527524 


11-28-95 


$ 


213.51 




19) Wiinams, Robert C. 


517-0548867 


12-12-95 


$ 


213.52 




20) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0574248 


12-26-95 


J_ 


213.50 


$ 4,275.62 


21) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0593468 


01-09-96 


$ 


167.80 




22) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0611217 


01-23-96 


s 


168.75 




23) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0631148 


02-06-96 


$ 


16928 




24) Wilfiams. Robert C. 


517-0651288 


02-20-96 


$ 


216.12 




25) Wiinams, Robert C. 


517-0670541 


03-05-96 


$ 


169.28 




26) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0688614 


03-19-96 


$ 


216.11 




27) Wiinams, Robert C. 


517-0706199 


04-02-96 


$ 


216.12 




28) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0723292 


04-16-96 


$ 


260.12 


" 


29) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0740282 


04-30-96 


$ 


216.12 




30) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0789774 


06-11-96 


$ 


21322 




31) Wimams, Robert C. 


517-0805032 


06-25-96 


$ 


166.39 




32) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0820569 


07-09-96 


$ 


69.21 




33) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0835903 


07-23-96 


$ 


223.11 




34) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0853641 


08-06-96 


$ 


17828 




35) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0869348 


08-20-96 


$ 


174.38 




36) Williams," Robert C. 


517-0885958 


09-03-96 


$ 


77.70 




37) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0902773 


09-17-96 


$ 


77.68 




38) Williams. Robert C. 


517^0918430 


10-01-96 


$ 


252.23 




39) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0934103 


10-15-96 


$ 


61.93 




40) Williams. Robert C. 


. 517-0934104 


10-15-96 


5 


316.95 




41) Williams, Robert C. 


517-0981127 


11-26-96 


$ 


57.45 




42) Williams. Robert C. 


517-0996433 


12-10-96 


* 


42.82 




43) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1011823 


12-24-96 


5_ 


160.34 


$ 3,871.39 


44) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1041066 


01-21-97 


$ 


182.88 




45) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1056083 


02-04-97 


$ 


113.54 




46) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1129865 


04-15-97 


$ 


3826 




47) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1158637 


05-13-97 


$ 


74.17 




48) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1173080 


05-27-97 


$ 


166.88 




49) Williams, Robert C. 


• 517-1187425 


06-10-97 


$ 


194.51 




50) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1200961 


06-24-97 


$ 


157.28 




51) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1214936 


07-08-97 


$ 


138.33 




52) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1228834 


07-22-97 


$ 


158.95 




53) Williams. RobertC. 


517-1242452 


08-05-97 


$ 


140.38 




54) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1255857 


08-19-97 


$ 


203.41 




55) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1270137 


09-02-97 


$ 


190.81 




56) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1283974 


09-16-97 


$ 


210.34 




57) Williams. Robert C. 


517-1298046 


09-30-97 


$ 


327.11 




58) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1311921 


10-14-97 


$ 


140.38 




59) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1326200 


10-28-97 


$ 


203.40 




. 60) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1339833 


11-11-97 


$ 


255.15 




61) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1353403 


11-25-97 


$ 


228.64 


ft 


62) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1367765 


12-09-97 


$ 


89.66 




63) Williams, Robert C. 


517-1382698 


12-23-97 
Grand Total 


J_ 


152.99 


5JL2S7J2S 
$11.514 07 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 14, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 2 -File 98-1641 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Controller's Office 

Resolution waiving the Statute of Limitations with 
respect to the payment of two warrants of the City and 
County of San Francisco, in the total amount of $7,863.32, 
a legal obligation of the City and County of San Francisco. 

According to Section 10.181 of the Administrative Code, a 
warrant issued by the City becomes void one year from 
the date issued. According to Section 10.182 of the 
Administrative Code, the payee of the warrant may 
present the warrant to the Controller for payment up to 
three years from the date that it was rendered invalid or 
four years from the original issue date, and the Controller 
is authorized to draw a new warrant in favor of the payee 
in the same amount as the original warrant. After that 
time period, when the Statute of Limitations has expired, 
the Controller may no longer pay such a warrant without 
first obtaining approval from the Board of Supervisors. 

The proposed resolution would waive the statute of 
limitations and would authorize the Controller's Office to 
replace two warrants, one for accrued vacation pay and 
the other for accrued sick pay, totaling $7,863.32 issued 
on July 8, 1992 to Mr. Randy Williams, a former employee 
of the Police Department, as follows: 



Payee 



Warrant No. Date Issued Amount 



Randy Williams 
Randy Williams 



516-9037239 
516-9037240 

Total 



07/08/92 
07/08/92 



$3,931.66 
3,931.66 

$7,863.32 



Comments: 



1. According to Mr. John Madden of the Controller's 
Office, the two warrants were previously issued by the 
Police Department to Mr. Williams, who died before 
cashing the warrants. The Controller's Office reports that 
the warrants have been cancelled. Claim to the funds has 
been made by Ms. Mary Williams, the beneficiary of Mr. 
William's estate. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

4 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 14, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. Mr. Madden advises that there are sufficient funds in 
the Warrants Account of the FY 1998-99 General City 
Responsibilities Budget to pay for the one new warrant in 
the amount of $7,863.32 that would be reissued to Ms. 
Williams by the Controller's Office. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

5 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 14, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 3 - File 98-1528 



Department: 



Item: 



Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Public Transportation Commission (PTC) 

Hearing to consider establishing benchmark and 
performance standards for MUNI which would allow the 
Finance Committee to track improvements in all areas of 
MUNI service. 



Description: 



The Finance Committee recommended funding MUNI's 
entire FY 1998-99 budget which was finally approved by 
the Board of Supervisors in the amount of $333,145,441. 
The FY 1998-99 MUNI budget is $26,881,217 more than 
the $306,264,224 budget approved for MUNI in FY 1997- 
98. 

In recommending approval of the FY 1998-99 MUNI 
budget to the full Board of Supervisors, with no budget 
reductions to the Mayor's recommended MUNI budget, 
the Finance Committee requested that the Director of 
Public Transportation report back to the Committee with 
a strategic plan including benchmark and performance 
standards that will track the Department's improvement 
based on the "no excuses budget." The Director of Public 
Transportation was also requested by the Finance 
Committee to subsequently report back to the Finance 
Committee on the Department's progress on a quarterly 
basis, based on the standards set forth by the Finance 
Committee. 

The Director of Public Transportation was requested to 
provide the Finance Committee with a comprehensive 
report, providing quantifiable benchmark and 
performance standards for purposes of tracking MUNI's 
improvements in the areas of rekability, safety, and 
customer service. 



Comments: 



1. Mr. P.J. Johnston of the Department of Public 
Transportation advised that Mr. Emilio Cruz will report 
directly to the Finance Committee on this matter at its 
Committee meeting of October 14, 1998. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 14, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. The Budget Analyst has received the Controller's 
latest Monthly Salary and Fringe Benefit Projection 
Report. The Controller's report, based on the first 5.8 pay 
periods of FY 1998-99 (for the period between July 1, 1998 
and September 18, 1998) provides the following 
projections: 

• Using actual expenditure data from the last pay period 
(ending September 18, 1998), the Controller projects 
that the Municipal Railway will end FY 1998-99 with 
a salary and fringe benefit surplus of $5,836,705. 

• Based on the average actual expenditures for the first 
5.8 pay periods, the Municipal Railway will end FY 
1998-99 with a salary and fringe benefit surplus of 
$7,946,621. 

Based on the actual salary and fringe benefit expenditure 
data presented in the Monthly Salary- and Fringe Benefit 
Projection Report, the Budget Analyst concurs with the 
Controller's projections. 

3. Mr. Fred Clarke of the Department of Public 
Transportation responds to the Controller's projections by 
noting that MUNI's spending of the salary and fringe 
benefits budget should not be projected on a straight line 
basis. MUNI is preparing to launch a hiring effort to fill 
existing vacancies which would result in a significantly 
higher rate of salary and fringe benefit expenditure than 
the rate shown in the first quarter's spending. Mr. Clarke 
advises that to project MUNI's spending based on actual 
expenditures in the first quarter, without consideration of 
planned future expenditures, would result in an 
inaccurate projection. Mr. Clarke further notes that 
MUNI does not anticipate a FY 1998-99 budget surplus in 
salaries and fringe benefits. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

October 14, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



The Budget Analyst acknowledges that the MUNI budget 
was based on increased hiring throughout the Fiscal Year, 
and increasing rates of expenditures as new employees 
are hired. However, over the first 5.8 pay periods of the 
Fiscal Year, MUNI spending does not appear to have 
shown dramatic increases. In the professional judgement 
of the Budget Analyst, it is likely, based on the evidence 
so far, that MUNI will finish the Fiscal Year with a 
surplus in its salary and fringe benefit accounts. 




^^-rz^ 



[arvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

8 



I 



BOARD of SUPERVISORS 




401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308 

San Francisco 94102-4532 

Tel. No. 554-5184 

TDD No. 554-5227 



nPPT. 



DOCUMENTS 

OCT 15 1998 






^NOTICE OF CANCELLED MEETING 

, FINANCE COMMITTEE 
SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



sss^ 



NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the regularly scheduled Finance 
Committee meeting of Wednesday, October 21, 1998, at 1:00 p.m., at 
401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 410, has been £ancelled^ 




Gloria L. Young 
Clerk of the Board 




I 

dice (le<i 



BOARD of SUPERVISORS 




401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 308 

San Francisco 94102-4532 

554-5184 



NOTICE OF CANCELLED MEETING 



FINANCE COMMITTEE 



SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

OCT 2 2 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the regularly scheduled Finance 
Committee meeting of Wednesday, October 28, 1998, at 1:00 p.m., at 
401 Van Ness Avenue, Room 410, has been cancelled. 



Gloria L. Young 
Clerk of the Board